Mr. Chairman, I wish to claim the privilege of the half hour. Before dealing with certain specific issues to which I should like the hon. the Minister’s response, I should like to make a few general comments, largely in anticipation of the attitude which I discovered the hon. the Minister adopts when we discuss his department. Mr. Chairman, he has a habit of tending to overgild the lily in regard to what his department is doing. I anticipate that on this occasion, as on previous occasions, he will go to great lengths, as is his right, to tell us of the sums of money which his department is spending on the Indian community, to tell us of the advances of Indian education and of the number of houses that are being built. It is almost as if these are favours that are being done for the Indian community rather than giving them facilities which are their right as citizens of South Africa. He sketches some sort of Utopia which he attributes very largely to the policies being pursued by the Government in terms of their general philosophy of separate development.

I think one should look for a moment at the Indian community in relation to the background against which they exist in terms of present Government policy. I believe that there is very cold comfort indeed for South Africa’s Indian community, our smallest minority group, in the separate development policies of the present Government. I believe that these policies very often inflict severe hardships on members of this section of the South African community. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the divisions and the tensions created by Government policies place this minority group of South Africa in a totally untenable position, poised as they are between a voiceless and a restless Black majority on the one hand and the White ruling group, numerically superior to them, on the other hand. The irony of their situation lies in the fact that freed from the racial restrictions imposed by present Government policies, in the nature of their character and their background they could and should be making a major contribution to the development of all in the plural society in which they live. They are an industrious community. They are an intelligent and civilized community. They are a loyal and patriotic community and, when they are affluent, they are a generous community. And yet they are constantly thwarted by our restrictive race laws. They are thwarted from achieving their full potential and in making their maximum contribution to the society around them.

How are they thwarted? Be more specific.

I am going to be more specific. Could the hon. the Minister just be a little patient? Despite assurances to the contrary they are, for example, subjected, as are other Blacks in South Africa, to race discrimination at almost every point in their daily lives. The hon. the Minister cannot deny that. Race discrimination is rife and they are subject to race discrimination in almost every sphere of life. They are denied reasonable access to public amenities, to restaurants, hotels, places of entertainment and places of amusement. They suffer the disabilities of inadequate job opportunities. They have been subjected to almost total insecurity in regard to the occupation of their homes and of their businesses. Figures given by the hon. the Minister show, for example, that in terms of the Group Areas Act removals, 2 225 White families involving some 8 299 people have been moved as against 34 294 Indian families involving some 172 156 people. The hon. the Minister has also during this session told us that in terms of the Group Areas Act, as at 31 December 1978, 389 Whites have still to be moved as against some 59 437 Indian people.

When one looks just at the operation of the Group Areas Act which has played such a tremendous part in the disabilities suffered by the Indian community, one can see that of the two population groups they have been affected far more, and to a very considerable extent more, than the White community of South Africa. These removals have very often taken place despite a desperate shortage of housing and, notwithstanding creditable improvement in recent years, this still exists in respect of the Indian community. [Interjections.] I hope that the hon. the Minister is not going to suggest that there has not been a desperate shortage of Indian housing. Is that what the hon. the Minister is interjecting; that there has in fact not been a shortage of Indian housing? Because that conflicts with his own departmental reports. I have said that there has been improvement in recent years towards catching up with the backlog but the fact remains that there is still a desperate shortage of housing for the Indian community. And if one looks over the past five or ten years, and even further back, the fact remains that the Indian community has suffered desperately in regard to the shortage of housing.

Then there is a further disability that they suffer from. The hon. the Minister wanted examples. They have been denied any real say in respect of the laws in terms of which they are governed in South Africa, despite the fact that most of those Indians are third and fourth generation South Africans. Mr. Chairman, the operation of the Indian Council has j provided some machinery for consultation with the Indian community, but this falls very far short of any meaningful participation in government as members of the Indian Council would be the first to admit. Even now when they are told that they will be part of the Government’s proposed new constitutional dispensation—they and the Coloureds were told this some two years ago—their participation will be limited to consultation. They are given no part in the decision-making process in regard to the future constitution. The select committee which has been appointed to deal with this matter ought to have been a commission—we have said this on so many previous occasions or a convention representative of all sections of South African society, including the Indian community. They should have been party to the making of any new constitution for South Africa. But even in this vital matter concerning all South Africans, they find themselves being dealt with purely on a basis of consultation. The council will be consulted; it has been consulted and it has rejected the original proposals of the Government. It has been consulted and no doubt it will be allowed to give evidence before the select committee but they will not be part of the decision-making process itself.

So, Sir, before we consider some of the details of the activities of the hon. the Minister’s department in providing for some of the needs of the Indian community, I have found it necessary to sketch the background against which this community operates in South Africa. As I have said, it is a background of discrimination, a background of the denial of reasonable job opportunities, a background of lack of security as far as residential tenure is concerned, of threats to Indian traders, of no effective part in the decision-making process, a background of assaults on the human dignity of this section of our population. So much for the general comments, Sir.

I want now to deal with certain specific matters relating to what the department is doing, relating to the future of the Indian community. The first is the question of the proposed election for the Indian Council. I want the hon. the Minister to tell us what date is being set for this election to take place. My information is that at the present rate of progress in regard to setting up the mechanics for the election, it would appear that there is very little hope of an election taking place, as was originally requested by the Indian Council, some time in November of this year. I should like the hon. the Minister to indicate …

When did they request that?

Those are the indications they have always given, Sir. Earlier in debates in the House when the Bill was under discussion the suggestion was that they wanted the election round about November this year. I understood that the hon. the Minister was ad idem with them and that this was going to be the aim. I am now told by certain members of the Indian Council that they see this as an impossibility and I would like the hon. the Minister to tell us what the difficulties are. Have there been difficulties in regard to delimitation? Have there been difficulties in regard to the compilation of the voters’ rolls? What are the mechanical difficulties which seem at this stage to make it improbable or impossible for an election to be held in November of this year as was required or requested by members of the Indian community?

I have to tell you that you seem to be quite out of touch with the position.

Well, the hon. the Minister can tell me that but he must not contradict what he said earlier this year when the matter was discussed in the House and when there seemed to be general agreement that the aim was to have the election take place in about November of this year.

The other matter I want to deal with is the question of to whether the hon. the Minister is conscious of the views of the Indian community in regard to the central business areas in the main cities of South Africa. Here, too, it would seem that there is very great room indeed for a change in Government attitude and a change in Government thinking. I think primarily of the situation which exists in Durban, which is obviously the area which I know best, particularly the restricted business occupation of the Indian community in the Grey Street complex. This matter has been raised in the past, Sir. One knows that the Indian community have asked for these restrictions to be lifted. One also knows that the Durban Chamber of Commerce has asked that the central business district of Durban be considered as a whole and without restrictions. It would seem that a concession by this Minister in his present capacity or wearing his other hat, whatever the case may be, should be considered in the interests of the Indian community. He should consider removing the restrictions which confine the Indian business community in the central area of Durban to what is generally known as the Grey Street complex. This applies to other areas of South Africa as well. Surely, Sir, in matters of this kind where trading is concerned the principle of free competition is a good principle and should be observed. The Indians should be allowed to participate in that sort of competition.

Then I should like to ask the hon. the Minister a further question if I could have his attention. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether he could give us some comment on the report during the weekend that the Attorney-General of the Transvaal had ordered the postponement of a number of trials under the Group Areas Act relating to people living illegally in White areas. He said that he had certain information regarding the alleged shortage of accommodation in Coloured and Indian areas. When I spoke earlier about the lack of accommodation for the Indian community the hon. the Minister interjected, and now it would seem that he will also have to deal with the Attorney-General of the Transvaal who seems to have seen fit, because of reports that had been made to him in respect of the shortage of accommodation for the Indian community, to postpone certain trials that were pending relating to Indian people who found themselves living in White areas.

In view of the attitude of the Attorney-General in this instance, will the hon. the Minister take steps in the meantime to prevent further prosecutions from taking place of unfortunate people who find themselves living in White areas and who have no alternative accommodation?

This is not the Justice Vote.

Well, Sir, the hon. the Minister exercises authority whether he is wearing his hat as Minister of Indian Affairs or whether he is wearing his hat as Minister of Community Development. He must exercise some authority because we are obviously dealing here with the interests of the Indian community. The hon. the Minister can open one newspaper after another and he will find heartrending stories of Indian people who have been evicted from properties because they happen to be just within the perimeter of a White area. Those people are then compelled to live under all sorts of conditions, in temporary accommodation, in tents and the like, while those same properties from which they have been evicted stand vacant for months. This is certainly something which should receive the hon. the Minister’s attention because it does affect, and affects in very real terms, members of the Indian community.

The whole question of the housing shortage to which I want to return, is a matter which must receive the attention of the hon. the Minister. Here I have a letter relating to a particular person whose name I shall not mention. I shall read sections of the letter. It relates to the difficulties encountered by Indian families in Johannesburg at the present time in connection with housing. It says—

So the letter goes on. It states—

I also have a copy here of a letter from the Regional Representative to the person concerned, which says—

This again is confirmation that there is a very serious housing shortage. Removals have been taking place and the result is that the department on its own admission—and one has sympathy for it—has to say to people: “We cannot provide you with such-and-such accommodation. ” Here are people who are prepared to buy their own house and who are able to buy their own house, but they are denied the opportunity of doing so because the department cannot meet their requirements. This is a matter which must receive the attention of the hon. the Minister.

Then I want to deal with another matter altogether and, as one is restricted by time, the hon. the Minister will understand that if one is dealing with what might seem like a number of unrelated matters …

I am not worried about the time; I am listening to what you have to say.

The hon. the Minister has much more time than I do and these matters are the responsibility of the hon. the Minister.

I want to deal with the whole issue of the future of Sastri College in Durban. Earlier this year, in reply to a question, the hon. the Minister issued a statement which was a plausible statement at the time, and one felt it was a reasonable statement. I quote from Hansard—

And so the hon. the Minister went on. But he based his case on the fact that there was a decline in enrolment at Sastri College. As I say, at the time when one listened to that statement one could not argue with it because it appeared to be a reasonable and a plausible statement. But since then other information has come to my knowledge, and I think the hon. the Minister must have another look at the whole question of Sastri College. This is an institution well steeped in the traditions of the Durban and Natal Indian community, and I think before the hon. the Minister takes steps to close an institution of this kind he must give very careful consideration indeed to what he is doing.

The information which I have, Sir, indicates that the statement that the enrolment was declining because of shifts in population is in fact not correct. The facts that are given to me are that enrolment at Sastri College in 1977 was 760; in 1978 it was 811; in 1979 it is 835. Enrolment at neighbouring high schools which are also in the central area of Durban has not suffered any diminution through shifts of population either, and one can quote examples here, Sir. There is the Durban Indian Girls High School which has 1 140 pupils; Orient High School, 423; Gandhi High School, 659; St. Anthony’s, 141; Loram High School, 475. The total high school enrolment in the Durban Central area is 3 673, which is not in support of the hon. the Minister’s contention that student population in the central area is in fact dwindling. I think the hon. the Minister must look at these figures and he must re-examine his own reply to the earlier question.

Another factor concerning Sastri College is that Sastri College, unlike the other high schools, apparently draws its pupils from the central area plus only two feeder schools, and those two feeder schools are Mayville High School and Pinetown High School which only go up to Std. 8. But apparently by some decree, some law or by-law, Sastri College is only able to draw any pupils outside of the central area from those two high schools after Std. 8. Despite that, Sir, its enrolment figure has increased, and not decreased, over the past three years.

I know that one of the reasons for taking over Sastri College was to allow for expansion of the M. L. Sultan Technikon, as it is now known. But here again there is reason to re-think the position because there is land available behind M. L. Sultan, between M. L. Sultan and Botanic Gardens Road. M. L. Sultan has already involved itself in some degree of decentralization because it has a hostel which is some 5 km away from its present site. So it would seem that it is not necessary, really, to attack Sastri College as a high school, as a deep-seated symbol of the Indian community’s heritage for advancement in education. It was an institution that the hon. the Minister will know was founded and funded by the Indian community on a voluntary basis in the first instance, and it has a very proud tradition in that community. We must ask ourselves, Mr. Chairman, what our attitude would be, if it was Port Natal High School which was being affected, or Michael-house or Hilton. I am told that there is a very great deal of feeling among the Indian community. Despite whatever support the hon. the Minister may have had or indications of support from the Indian Council, I am told that there is a very great deal of feeling among the Indian community that the removal or closing down of Sastri College as a high school must be stopped if at all possible. I appeal to the hon. the Minister to reconsider his attitude in this regard.

There is one final matter I should like to raise and this also concerns Durban and its environs. I refer to the Phoenix Township outside Durban, which is an impressive housing scheme, and here one can pay tribute to the department and those involved for the number of houses that have been built. I want to say to the hon. the Minister it is a pity that again contrary to what one had accepted as policy in the past, the people concerned with building Phoenix have not been able to build amenities such as schools and sports fields alongside the houses. Again the indications from the community are that while they are obviously thrilled to have better accommodation, which is a prime factor, in many cases, because they have got children and because there are no schools immediately available to those children, the children cannot live with their parents and, in fact, are boarding in and around Durban where they are closer to school accommodation. I would say, Sir, that it is a pity as a matter of policy that when housing developments of this kind take place, amenities are not provided alongside those developments.

Finally, referring again to Phoenix, I should be interested to hear what the attitude of the hon. the Minister is, and what his department’s attitude is, to the dispute which has been taking place as to whether Phoenix should be excised from the City of Durban or should be retained within the City of Durban, because this again is a matter which has occasioned a good deal of comment and consideration and anguish among the people concerned.

These are all matters, Sir, which I believe warrant replies from the hon. the Minister; they are of deep concern to the Indian community and I await the hon. the Minister’s reply with interest.

Mnr. die Voorsitter, as ek ’n opsomming moet maak van die toespraak wat die agb. lid vir Musgrave gehou het, dan moet ek, soos die ou man, sê dit was altesame niks gewees nie. Ek sou graag vanjaar wou gesien het dat ons as regerende party asook die Opposisiepartye hiematoe moes kom om in hierdie debat werklikwaar teenoor mekaar die beginsels van ons onderskeie beleidsrigtings moes kom stel het. Die Opposisie kon gesê het: Goed, kom ons kritiseer die Regering ten opsigte van twee sake. Eerstens is daar die vaste beginsels waarvolgens hy die bevolkingsprobleme van Suider-Afrika wil oplos, en tweedens is daar die toets om te bepaal watter mate van sukses behaal is of die mate van mislukkings wat ondervind is. Dié twee kon teenoor mekaar opgeweeg gewees het.

Aan die ander kant sou dit goed gewees het as dié agb. lid, wat ’n baie senior lid van die PFP is, ’n baie ou lid, vir ons sou gesê het: In teenstelling met die NP, hier is ons beginsels en volgens die projeksies wat ons op ons beginsels maak, sou ons so en so ’n beleid bou vir die Indiër in Suider-Afrika wat vir hom beter sou gewees het as onder die bedeling van die NP.

Ons bespreek die Minister se pos.

Maar, mnr. die Voorsitter, ons het nie een van hierdie twee gesonde argumente van die agb. lid gekry nie. Daarom sê ek dat altesame het die agb. lid vir my niks gesê nie. Hy het ’n klompie algemene opmerkings gemaak wat vir my skokkend was. In die eerste instansie—wat nou nie so skokkend was nie; die tweede gedeelte was meer skokkend—het hy gesê; dat die agb. Minister te veel spog; die agb. Minister kom hier en hy raak te entoesiasties oor wat hy en sy departement gedoen het. Ek i dink dat die agb. Minister nie net geesdrif moet openbaar wat dit betref nie, maar dat hy die reg het om dit te doen. Ek dink die agb. lid vir Musgrave het nooit naby die verslag van die Departement van Indiërsake gekom nie. Ek dink hy het nie ’n woord gelees van wat daarin staan nie. Hy het eenvoudig ’n bietjie losstaande kritiek saamgeflans en dit hier aan ons kom opdis. Gewoonlik maak hy hier en daar van briewe gebruik, maar vanjaar het hy nog net een ontvang. Ons kan nie op hierdie wyse ’n deeglike debat voer oor die sake wat ons vanmiddag moet behandel nie. Ek dink dat die agb. Minister met goeie reg die geesdrif kan openbaar wat hy jaarliks in hierdie Raad openbaar.

Die agb. lid vir Musgrave het verder gesê dat die Indiërs in Suid-Afrika slegs „cold comfort” het. Ek wil wegskram daarvan om na die geskiedenis van die Indiër in Suid-Afrika, Afrika en in die wêreld te kyk, want dit gee vir mens altyd die indruk dat ons vir die Indiërs in Suid-Afrika wil sê dat hulle tevrede moet wees met wat hulle het, want kyk net hoe gaan dit in die res van die wêreld met hulle. ’n Mens wil graag met hierdie bevolkingsgroep in Suid-Afrika gesprekke voer en vir hulle die beste gee wat jy kan, want die geskiedenis het hierdie mense onder ons verantwoordelikheid geplaas. Ek dink die gesindheid waarin die NP dit oor die afgelope dekades gedoen het, juis was om hierdie mense tegemoet te kom en om vir hulle en vir ons ’n lewenspad uit te kap. Ek wil aan die Indiërs sê dat in die beleid van die agb. lid vir Musgrave ook die vernietiging van my as Witman se voortbestaan ingebou is. Die agb. lid moet gaan kyk na die geskiedenis van die Indiër in Afrika. Hy het gesê dat die Indiërs moet leef tussen ’n klomp Swart mense wat „voiceless and restless” is. Dit is volslae onsin. Waar in Suider-Afrika is die Swart mense „voiceless”? Waar is hulle so „restless”? Waar in die wêreld het ’n mens vandag nie die probleem dat daar mense is wat onrustig is nie? Die agb. lid het gesê dat die Indiërs in Suid-Afrika tussen Swart mense lewe wat „voiceless” is. Die agb. lid weet mos dit is nie waar nie. Hy kan dit mos nie sê nie.

In hierdie Volksraad.

Die agb. lid het nie gepraat van die Volksraad nie.

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, is the hon. member allowed to say that the hon. member for Musgrave knows it is not true?

Orde! Die agb. lid moet dit terugtrek.

Ek trek dit terug as ek enigiets gesê het wat onparlementêr is, mnr. die Voorsitter. Ek wil net sê dat die agb. lid vir Musgrave nie in sy toespraak gesê het dat hulle „voiceless” is omdat hulle nie verteenwoordiging in die Blanke Parlement het nie. Hy het ’n kategoriese stelling gemaak.

Ek wil terugkom by die kwessie by die Indiër in Afrika. Dwarsoor Afrika kon die Indiërs nog nooit ’n bestaan maak in ’n Staat waar die meerderheid van die bevolking Swart was nie. Die agb. lid kritiseer nou egter vir ons in Suid-Afrika wat ’n bedeling wil uitwerk waarvolgens elke bevolkingsgroep die geleentheid sal kry om homself te regeer en waar hy oor sy eie sake sal besluit. Sulke redenasies is absoluut absurd. Die agb. lid moet eerder vir die agb. Minister of die departement vra hoeveel Indiërs oor die afgelope drie dekades uit Suid-Afrika geëmigreer het en hoeveel Indiërs in dieselfde tydperk gevra het om na Suid-Afrika te immigreer. Toe ek in my kiesafdeling probleme ondervind het met die heer Packer, wat in ’n Blanke gebied gewoon het, het ’n vooraanstaande Indiërsakeman uit een van die state ten Noorde van ons my in my studeerkamer besoek. Hy het vir my gesê dat hy graag na Suid-Afrika wil immigreer. Ek het toe my verbasing daaroor uitgespreek en het vir hom gevra waarom hy na Suid-Afrika wil kom. Hy het toe vir my gesê dat hy in een van die Noordelike state van Afrika woon, ’n broer in Engeland en een in Amerika het en dat hy self al dikwels Indië besoek het. Daar is egter nêrens ’n plek waar hy eerder vir hom en sy gesin ’n toekoms wil uitbou as juis in Suider-Afrika nie.

Met die soort van debatvoering van die agb. lid vir Musgrave kan ons net nie verder kom nie. Ons kan net nie vorder met ’n Opposisie soos die PFP nie. Hulle is nie net teenoor die Regering onbillik nie, maar ook teenoor die Indiërgemeenskap van Suider-Afrika en die hele posisie wat ’n mens hier aantref. Hulle is besig om ’n verkeerde—ek wil amper sê valse—beeld skep van wat in Suider-Afrika ten opsigte van die Indiërgemeenskap aan die gang is. Ek sal toegee dat daar in elke gemeenskap mense is wat kla. Ek kan Blankes gaan haal wat sal kla oor behuising en oor alle ander fasette van hulle lewens, soos ’n mens ook in enige ander gemeenskap sal kry. Agb. lede aan die oorkant moet dan egter met ’n beleid voor ’n dag kom wat as alternatief kan dien. Die Indiërgemeenskap is die gemeenskap wat onder die PFP se beleid die vinnigste sal agteruitgaan en die gouste uit Suid-Afrika sal vlug. Die bydrae van die agb. lid vir Musgrave was vandag uiters power.

In teenstelling hiermee groei die beleid van die Nasionale Party ten opsigte van Suider-Afrika steeds. Die grondslag van veelvolkigheid van die beleid is jare gelede reeds vasgelê. Die Indiërgemeenskap het homself as ’n bepaalde gemeenskap geïdentifiseer en ons het ten opsigte van elke faset van hierdie mense se lewens, byvoorbeeld die onderwys, gemeenskapslewe, kultuurlewe, ens., ’n vaste grondslag gelê waarop daar voortgebou is. Ek wil die agb. lid vir Musgrave vra om vir my een faset van hierdie mense se lewens te wys wat nie verbeter het sedert ons daardie grondslag gelê het nie. Daar was inderdaad groeiprobleme en tekorte in sekere opsigte, maar baie probleme wat individue ondervind, is dikwels hulle eie probleme. Die Indiërgemeenskap, net soos alle ander gemeenskappe in Suid-Afrika, het dit die beste as ’n mens dit vergelyk met ander soortgelyke gemeenskappe in die wêreld. In hierdie verband wil ek na die diensstaat van die departement verwys wat in die verslag verskyn. Daar is 919 poste in hierdie departement, waarvan 783 deur Indiërs beklee word, d.w.s. 85%. ’n Week gelede het ’n lid van die PFP in Transvaal in ’n ander debat gekla dat daar te veel Suid-Afrikaners is in Engelstalige skole. Met ander woorde, aan die een kant kla die PFP dat te veel Afrikaanssprekendes na vore kom om hulle dienste aan te bied by Engelstalige skole, terwyl hulle aan die ander kant die verkeerde gesindheid by mense soos dr. Motlana aankweek wat sê dat hy nie Afrikaners wil hê wat hulle by die PFP skaar nie. [Tyd verstreke.]

Mr. Chairman, I do not agree with what the hon. member for Rissik has had to say this afternoon because his policies and the policies of the party that I represent are diametrically opposed to one another. However, I agree with one thing I know he will say, namely that recent history has shown us that the Indian feels greater security in South Africa than he does in any other country on the African continent. Of that there is no doubt whatever.

He was a little wrong in what he said about the hon. member for Musgrave who delivered a fine shotgun speech here this afternoon. He raised many points that do need reply and I sincerely hope that the hon. the Minister will reply to them. There are a number of them that I would have raised myself. However, the hon. member for Rissik was wrong when he said that the hon. member for Musgrave did not talk policy. The hon. member for Musgrave did; he spoke good New Republic Party policy which I enunciated last year in this debate when I raised with the hon. the Minister the problem regarding the Indian trader in the central business districts.

I think the hon. the Minister and I talked past each other last year and I would like to raise this topic again with him because in his reply to me he made reference to living quarters in the central business districts. Mr. Chairman, I was not in any way referring to the sort of situation where you have the Grey Street type of shop or flat over the shop aspect, i.e. not a block of flats with shops below. I am talking about bona fide businesses, business houses of the likes of John Orr’s, the likes of the department stores that one finds when one walks down the main streets of our towns that do not have residential flats above them but office blocks. This is the type of business that I am talking about. I want to say to the hon. the Minister that since last year I think he has come a long way in this regard and I will make reference to his report in a moment. But I think that since last year what I have noticed in Durban—and I have gone into this very carefully—is a tremendous increase in the number of “fronts”. Now, I do not want to point fingers but this is what is happening. We are getting shops in the central business district of Durban particularly that are to all intents and purposes White businesses, but they are not. There is a White person, an individual, in that shop, but it is an Indian business. Let us face facts. It is an Indian business and he is conducting a good class of business in a good class area. If he does not conduct that type of business then he is just going to fade out, to die off, because he is competing with high quality businesses on either side of him. So I think the time has come for us to be honest with ourselves on this issue. I think the time has come when we must say: Right, they are there, let them trade openly and let them trade with a proper licence, with their names reflected on the licence, and let us not have any undercover work here. Let us make the thing absolutely legal.

Now, Mr. Chairman, in the annual report of the Department of Indian Affairs—which I have read with great interest and I must say there is a tremendous amount in this report that reflects a steady improvement—I was delighted to see the following on page 17—

This is a step in the right direction. The report goes on to say—

This, Mr. Chairman, is what we want.

If that is what you want, you will get it.

Thank you, Sir. The central business district…

You ask it, we have it. [Interjections.]

Yes, but you do not always give it. The central business districts in our cities must be open to all races. You are not opening to Blacks at this moment. We see this. That will come when the Blacks are able to compete, as the Indians are competing at the moment, with the White businesses in the central business districts.

May I ask the hon. member whether he is referring to cities only?

I am referring to the central business districts.

The central business districts of which places?

I see what the hon. the Minister is getting at. Every town has got a CBD, irrespective of which town it is. Let me use Howick, with its famous railway station, as an example. When you go into the town of Howick, what do you see there? Over the years it has been accepted that you have Indians trading cheek by jowl with Whites. So every town has its central business district. I do not care how big or small that town is; it does have its own central business district.

But not Bloemfontein.

No, certainly not Bloemfontein. I cannot help Bloemfontein but it does have its own policy about Indians!

In the field of agriculture, particularly again in Natal, I want to commend the hon. the Minister for at long last granting the Indian cane grower his 25-year-old ambition, which is his affiliation to the South African Sugar Association. This is a tremendous step. The South African Sugar Association is going to benefit immeasurably from it, and certainly the Indian Cane Growers’ Association, as it was known, has got a far brighter and rosier future to look forward to.

In the field of housing, I agree wholeheartedly with what the hon. member for Musgrave has said. Phoenix does concern me because I wonder whether we are keeping pace with school development in the area. I do not think it is anything as rapid as it should be. I think possibly, although we do have this tremendous shortfall of housing, that we have got to look at this problem of schools. There are a number of schools allocated for the area and a number are under construction, but I do not think this is being done quickly enough. While on this subject, at Stanger there is a scheme for the erection of 226 economic flats under construction which consists of 96 one-bedroomed flats and 130 two-bedroomed flats. One-bedroomed and two-bedroomed flats for Indian occupation pose a problem. Indians have large families and one- or two-bedroomed accommodation is something which we must look at very carefully.

Yes, but they do not have large families in the first year of their marriage. It does take some time.

Is the hon. the Minister suggesting that they must then move in and move out?

Yes, just as the Whites do.

But to where does the hon. the Minister mean?

I have an answer to that too.

Where do they move on to, that is the problem. The hon. the Minister says just like the Whites do, but I cannot accept that. I believe that the Indian, just like the White, wants to put down his roots. I think that he wants to stay somewhere and I do not think that he wants to say: I want to start my family here and then move on to there, and move on to there and there, and ultimately when all the children have left home I shall return to point A.

We all do that.

I think we want to put down roots, all of us. That is what it is all about.

Another point is telephones in Indian areas. I see that Chatsworth is being serviced better than it has been in the past and I understand that the situation has improved tremendously, but what about Phoenix? I have had a number of complaints from people who have moved into the Phoenix area. I know this is not the province of the hon. the Minister of Indian Affairs, but I would ask that the hon. the Minister, together with his colleague, the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications, does something about the situation in Phoenix. There are no telephones to speak of for Indians in Phoenix. This is a very pressing need in that area. After all, this is a new city, the city of the future, for Indians within the environs of the city of Durban, and communications are as vital to those people as they are to the White people who live to the north of Durban. I think line-wise the facilities are there, in that there is a new exchange that has been constructed in La Lucia and I also understand that there is a new exchange to be built in the near future in the Mount Edgecombe area.

In the field of education—I am afraid I am also being a little shotgun in my approach this afternoon—I am distressed to see that there has only been a slight decrease in the number of pupils who have to attend … [Time expired.]

Mnr. die Voorsitter, die agb. lid vir Umhlanga het sekere aanmerkings hier gemaak in verband met die besigheidsbedrywighede van Indiërs in die sentrale besigheidsgebiede, en terwyl die Riekert-kommissie ook daaroor verslag gelewer het, glo ek dat die agb. Minister wel deeglik daarop sal antwoord, en ook ten opsigte van die ander aangeleenthede wat die agb. lid geopper het.

Ek dink dat in die bepaalde tydvak waarin ons in Suid-Afrika lewe, kan geen bevolkingsgroep werklik afsydig staan teenoor die politieke realiteite van ons land en ook van die wêreld nie. Ek dink dit is ’n tyd waar ons mekaar nodig het, selfs meer as ooit tevore. Aan die een kant het ons die fynbeplande strategie van die kommunistiese aanslag teen Suid-Afrika, en aan die ander kant het ons die Westerse bondgenote wat blykbaar in die hande speel van hierdie fynbeplande aanslag met elke stap wat hulle doen. Dit lyk asof hulle telkens in die hande speel van hierdie nieu-imperialistiese aanslag in Afrika, en ek meen ons kan beswaarlik op hulle reken. Die Indiër-Suid-Afrikaner kan dit allermins bekostig om politieke eksperimente te maak wat die sekuriteit van die Suid-Afrikaanse maatskaplike orde sal benadeel. Hulle het dalk nog baie meer om te verloor, veral in die lig van die getuienis wat die agb. lid vir Rissik ook hier gegee het waarvolgens hulle waarskynlik sal vind dat hulle baie slegter daaraan toe sal wees selfs in hulle eie land van oorsprong, nl. Indië, en nie alleen polities slegter daaraan toe nie, maar inderdaad ekonomies baie slegter daaraan toe.

Mnr. die Voorsitter, die Indiër-Suid-Afrikaner speel ’n belangrike ekonomiese rol in Suid-Afrika en daarom is sy hoof politieke doelstelling dan ook gesentreer om selfbeveiliging en die hantering van sy eie belange. Die vrees van die Suid-Afrikaanse Indiër gaan dus hoofsaaklik oor ’n moontlike bedreiging van sy eiendoms- en handelsregte, ’n vrees wat soms heel ongegrond is. Dit gaan ook oor die verdringing en politieke bedreiging deur die Swart man. Elke keer as ’n mens met die Indiërs praat, kom hierdie onderwerp na vore. Om hierdie politieke doelstellings te bereik, het die Indiër-Suid-Afrikaner deur middel van verskeie politieke bewegings in die verlede geneig om skakeling te vind met die meer radikale linkse groepe in Suid-Afrika, maar in die jongste tyd begin dit in ’n toenemende mate deurdring by die Indiër-Suid-Afrikaner dat hy sy heil moet soek langs die weg van ’n konstitusionele evolusionêre proses wat die NP daargestel het.

Die agb. lid vir Musgrave het ook daarna verwys, maar ek meen die agb. lid maak hom skuldig aan ’n totale mistasting as hy dink dat die Indiër nie juis langs hierdie konstitusionele weg sy toekoms en heil in Suid-Afrika sal uitwerk nie.

Hulle kyk met nuwe oë na die voorgestelde konstitusionele bedeling. Onlangs het ek die voorreg gehad om ’n politieke samespreking te voer met die Indiërleiers in my kiesafdeling en saam met ander leiers in my gemeenskap het ons vir etlike ure lank openlik gepraat in verband met hierdie saak. Ek was absoluut oorweldig deur die entoesiasme en waardering vir hierdie geleentheid wat hulle gebied word en ek kan dit vanaand onomwonde stel dat die Indiër ’n nuwe era sien wat besig is om te ontsluit. Ek het trouens reeds verskeie versoeke gehad om soortgelyke byeenkomste in die res van Natal te hou.

Dit kom te laat.

Ek weet wat die agb. lid wil sê, en heeltemal tereg. Miskien het ons ’n fout begaan in die verlede in dié sin dat ons dikwels besluite geneem het vir die Indiër in plaas van met hom. Ek is heeltemal bereid om dit toe te gee. Daardie tyd is egter verby en ons beweeg nou in ’n nuwe dinamiese politieke bedeling in hierdie land wat inderdaad enige foute van die verlede sal uitskakel. Hierdie gebrek het miskien ongelukkig daartoe gelei dat die Indiër aansluiting probeer vind het met die Swart organisasies, en dat sekere van die politieke partye onder die Indiërs met Inkatha geskakel het, wat eintlik ’n Zoeloe-kultuurorganisasie is. Met ander woorde, in hulle soeke na sekuriteit en as gevolg van hul inherente vrees vir die Swart man na aanleiding van geskiedkundige gebeure in Suid-Afrika waarvan ons wel deeglik bewus is, het hulle tot so ’n onlogiese stap oorgegaan.

Dit was ook my voorreg om gedurende verlede jaar saam met verskeie Indiër- en Kleurlingleiers in Wes-Duitsland te reis, en ek was verbaas oor die lojale getuienis wat hierdie mense vir Suid-Afrika in die vreemde gegee het, ten spyte van hul uitgesproke politieke verskille met die Regering van Suid-Afrika. Dit het my groot genoegdoening verskaf toe die volgende standpunt by verskillende geleenthede gestel is. Hulle het dit soos volg aan die Duitsers gestel—

Meneer, dit is mense wat dink wat so praat, en ons moet hiervan kennis neem. En hierdie mense het baie soortgelyke standpunte in die buiteland gestel. Nou is hierdie veranderinge besig om plaas te vind in Suid-Afrika, nie alleen deur die uitskakeling van diskriminasie nie, maar ook deur die voorgestelde nuwe konstitusionele bedeling wat ’n nuwe selfverwesenlikingsproses vir die Indiër in die vooruitsig gestel het in Suid-Afrika, en wat sal bydra om juis sy hoof politieke oogmerke in die Suid-Afrikaanse bedeling te kan bereik. Hulle behoort te weet dat hierdie die enigste pad vir hulle is, en baie van hulle besef dat hulle hierdie pad moet volg. Want hulle weet ook in ’n toenemende mate dat die Nasionale Party bewys het dat dit ’n Regering is wat vertrou kan word, ’n Regering wat gesorg het vir die permanensie van die Indiër in Suid-Afrika as Suid-Afrikaanse burger. Hierdie Regering het groter vryheid van beweging vir hulle gebring en steeds groter seggenskap oor hul eie sake aan hulle gegee. Hierdie Regering was bereid om teen die opposisie van die Durbanse Stadsraad waarvan die agb. lede aan die oorkant die beheer het, die handelsregte van Indiërs in Durban te beskerm. Ontsaglike bedrae is bestee aan die skepping van beter en groter handelsgeleenthede vir die Indiërs. Hulle onderwys is uitgebrei sodat daar nou meer as 212 000 Indiërkinders op skool is in Suid-Afrika. En, soos reeds aangetoon is, het die Indiërs feitlik totale beheer oor hul eie skole.

Die bydrae van die Regering ten opsigte van maatskaplike dienste groei nog steeds, en so kan ons voortgaan met een voorbeeld na die ander.

Maar uit die aard van die saak het die Indiërgemeenskap probleme, heeltemal tereg, soos enige gemeenskap probleme het. In die eerste instansie wil ek verwys na een van hulle groot probleme. Dit staan in verband met sekere bepalings en die toepassing van die Groepsgebiedewet wat vir hulle tydelik probleme geskep het. As ons egter let op die voordele en geordenheid wat hierdie stappe meegebring het, sal ons besef dat dit die nadele van die toepassing van hierdie Wet by verre oortref. Daar is nog probleme in verband met die vraag na eiendom en grondbesit. Hierdie sake het ek al by verskillende geleenthede in soortgelyke debatte in die Volksraad genoem, en ek glo dat ook hierdie probleme uitgestryk sal word. [Tyd verstreke.]

Mnr. die Voorsitter, as ’n mens moet oordeel na die tyd wat vir hierdie debat opsy gesit is, sou jy kan dink dat hierdie nie ’n belangrike Pos is nie. In werklikheid is die portefeulje wat die agb. Minister beklee een van die heel belangrikste in die Kabinet omdat dit verhoudinge vir Suid-Afrika in die buiteland sowel as verhoudinge in die binneland raak. Dit het ingrypend te doen met menseverhoudinge.

Die Indiërgemeenskap het sterk kulturele en godsdienstige bande met die buiteland, en nie net met Indië en Pakistan nie. Daar is invloedryke Indiërgemeenskappe in baie lande van die wêreld, en dit geld veral die volgelinge van Islam. Die wêreld se Moslembevolking staan vandag op 1 000 miljoen, en dit val so dat die state wat onder Islamitiese beheer is, 70% van die wêreld se olie en byna dieselfde persentasie van die wêreld se voorraad natuurlike rubber besit, om maar net die twee belangrikste items te noem. Ons weet dat Islam besig is om te beweeg na groter eenheid in die wêreld en om ’n magtige faktor te word in die internasionale politiek. Daar word alreeds gepraat van Islam as ’n derde wêreldmag en as alternatief vir die kommunisme en die kapitalisme. Na berekening is daar sowat 350 000 Moslems in Suid-Afrika, waarvan nie almal Indiërs is nie maar verreweg die meeste wel. Daar is groeiende godsdienstige en ideologiese kommunikasie tussen hierdie belangrike groep Suid-Afrikaners en die lande van Arabië, die Midde-Ooste en ander plekke. Ek is nie besig om te pleit dat mense goed behandel moet word net omdat hulle belangrike bande na buite het nie. Ek glo regverdige behandeling is elke burger se natuurlike reg; hy behoort dit te kry omdat hy ’n burger is. Die punt wat ek egter wil stel, is dat die Indiërbevolking van ons land—die Indo-Suid-Afrikaners, Moslems, Hindus en andere—weens hulle spesiale wêreldverbintenisse magtige ambassadeurs vir Suid-Afrika kan word indien ons ’n politieke en sosiale orde in die binneland skep wat menswaardigheid erken en almal regverdig behandel.

Sover dit die Indiërgemeenskap betref, is daardie taak vir die huidige in die hande van die agb. Minister van Indiërsake. Daarom sê ek dit is so ’n uiters belangrike portefeulje in die Kabinet. Ek wil aan die agb. Minister vra: Voel hy dat hy sy plig in die opsig doen?

Natuurlik.

Voel hy dat hy ’n dinamiese pos van die Pos Indiërsake gemaak het, waar hy altyd en oral instaan en opkom vir die regte en belange van die Suid-Afrikaners van Indiër-afkoms? Voel hy dat hy in alle belangrike sake hulle gedagtes en wense in ag neem? Ek vra dit aan die agb. Minister; hy kan self daarop antwoord.

Die jongste bevolkingsyfer toon aan dat die getal Suid-Afrikaners van Indiër-afkoms nou byna een miljoen is. Hulle het geen verteenwoordiging in die hoogste Parlement nie. Hulle het besondere knap leiers op die politieke gebied; tewens hulle het altyd knap leiers gehad. Dit is leiers wat vorentoe geweldige bydraes kan lewer in die ontwikkeling van Suid-Afrika op die binnelandse terrein asook op die buitelandse politieke terrein as hulle toegelaat sou word om dit te doen. Goed, Meneer, masjinerie is in werking gestel—ons is dankbaar daarvoor—om te verseker dat die Indiërs minstens oor ’n jaar of langer—ek weet nie wanneer die proses voltooi sal wees nie—’n groter mate van erkenning in die politieke bestel van ons land sal hê as wat hulle tans het, hoe bevredigend of onbevredigend dit ook al vir hulle mag wees. Vir die huidige is die agb. Minister egter hulle verteenwoordiger in hierdie hoogste gesag. Daarom vra ek of hy self voel dat hy sy plig ten volle doen in dié verband.

Meneer, laat my toe om ’n paar voorbeelde te noem. Ons het bv. nou gehandel met ’n ingrypende Wetsontwerp wat die Pers kardinaal raak. [Tussenwerpsels.] Ons het belangrike Indiërkoerante in die land.

Dit sal die dag wees.

Daardie koerante sal ook deur die maatreël geraak word. Ek wil dié vraag aan die agb. Minister stel. Het die agb. Minister hulle bv. oor ’n belangrike wetsontwerp soos daardie een, geraadpleeg? Het hy kennis geneem van hulle wense, gedagtes en hul belange? [Tussenwerpsels.] As ek dit reg verstaan, wil die Regering ’n nuwe Grondwet opstel ingevolge waarvan daar ’n Kabinetsraad van Blankes, Indiërs en Kleurlinge sal wees wat op die grondslag van konsensus gevoer sal word. As konsensus oor gemeenskaplike sake die basis van die politieke bedeling van die toekoms gaan wees, waarom wag die agb. Minister totdat dit formeel ingestel is? Waarom begin hy nie dadelik om dit informeel toe te pas en op dié manier vertroue in daardie gedagte op te bou nie?

Meneer, niks versteur en ontwrig die lewens van die Indiërgemeenskap so veel as die toepassing van die Groepsgebiedewet nie. Dit is ’n feit. Niks het groter skade gedoen aan verhoudinge as juis die rondskuiwery en hervestiging van mense op grond van hul kleur nie. Ek sê dit afgesien van die onnodige miljoene wat dit die belastingbetaler gekos het. [Tussenwerpsels.] Ek wil aan die agb. Minister vra dat indien dit nie so was nie, waarom die beleid dan nou ten goede verander word? Daar is aanduidings dat die verskuiwing van Indiërhandelaars uit die sentrale handelsentrums van ons stede tot ’n einde gaan kom. Ek hoop dat die agb. Minister vandag aan ons ’n baie duidelike beleidsverklaring in verband met die saak gaan gee; hy moet aan ons sê presies waar hy staan. Ek hoop die motief van die Regering sal nie wees dat hy dit nie meer kan bekostig om mense rond te skuiwe nie, maar omdat dit ’n saak is van ’n eerlike verandering van beleid.

Meneer, ek het al vir 15 jaar gepleit dat die sentrale handelsgebiede van Suid-Afrika in ons stede en dorpe oop en vry moet wees vir almal om daar handel te drywe. Geen bevolkingsgroep het die reg om die beste handelsgebiede vir sy eie ontwikkeling te reserveer en ander bevolkingsgroepe op grond van hul ras of kleur daaruit te hou nie.

Hoor, hoor!

Dit is ’n onverdedigbare beleid. Solank dit in enige vorm bestaan, kan ons nie daarop aanspraak maak dat ons vrye handel voorstaan nie. Daar is verdere oorwegings. Diskriminasie tuis wek diskriminasie teen ons land in die buiteland. Ek wil graag van die agb. Minister verneem of die beleid voortaan een van werklike vrye handel en oop handels- en industriële gebiede gaan wees. Verder wil ek van hom verneem of dit sal geld nie net vir ons stede nie, maar ook vir ons plattelandse dorpe. Dit help nie ons val dubbele standaarde in die buiteland aan terwyl ons dubbele standaarde in ons eie land toepas nie. Daar mag nie ’n dubbele standaard gestel word ten opsigte van handelsgebiede in die sentrale stad en handelsgebiede in ’n dorp nie. Die agb. Minister moet erken dat hy in dié verband nog ’n diskriminerende posisie daarop nahou. Ek wil graag weet wat sy beleid in dié verband is. Ons beleid is dat die handelsentrums oral in stede en dorpe, oopgestel moet word en dat daar vrye handel moet wees.

Julle sal nie mense ingevolge die Groepsgebiedewet hervestig nie?

Ek sal daarby kom. Ek praat eers van handelsgebiede, en dan van residensiële.

Ek praat van handelaars.

Ja, ek handel nou eers met handelaars. Dit is twee aparte sake, nie waar nie?

Meneer, wat residensiële gebiede betref, glo ons die Regering behoort mense met rus te laat waar hulle is. Wanneer nuwe gebiede aangelê word, behoort dit deur konsensus of gesamentlike besluitneming te geskied of anders glad nie. Dit is die punt. Dit is die kern van ons beleid. Daar moet gesamentlike besluitneming wees. As daar verdeling moet wees moet dit nie op ’n eensydige basis geskied nie, maar op die basis van konvensies. Tientalle mense in Johannesburg verskyn voor die hof; hulle word vervolg omdat hulle nêrens in Indiërgebiede woonplekke kan kry nie. Ek glo as ’n persoon deur die Staat gedwing word om in ’n bepaalde gebied te gaan woon, die Staat dit vir hom moet moontlik maak om huisvesting daar te kry. So nie, moet so ’n persoon toegelaat word om huisvesting te neem waar hy dit kan kry. Daar kan nie van ’n man met ’n gesin verwag word om in die straat te sit nie. Ek dink dat dit in belang van beskaafde norme die agb. Minister se plig is om die beleid ook positief in dié opsig te verander. [Tyd verstreke.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Bezuidenhout has made a plea for a fair dispensation in respect of the Indian people and I have no quarrel with him in that regard. However, I think the Indian people of South Africa, and certainly those of Natal, would be the first to agree that they have never had it as good as has been the case under this Government for the past 31 years. In particular, they have accepted residential exclusivity. They have accepted areas where they can live by themselves. They have said so and their continual pleas for further land for the use of the Indian people by implication indicates their acceptance of the concept of residential exclusivity. We do not imply that there are no inherent problems in the juxtaposition of residential exclusivity on the one hand and a sharing of commercial and industrial areas on the other hand, as the hon. member for Umhlanga has referred to on page 17 of this report.

In the time at my disposal I want to deal briefly with one aspect of this juxtaposition of residential exclusivity and commercial and industrial sharing as well as the problems it is creating in regard to the development of Indian local government in our metropolitan areas. Mr. Chairman, I am aware that the Brown Committee is presently investigating the entire financial position of local authorities. I am also aware that the total abolition of property taxation in favour of the system of subsidies drawn from an increased general sales tax is probably one of the proposals that will no doubt be canvassed by this committee. Therefore when I talk about the position vis-á-vis local authorities and the development of local authorities for the Indian people, I am talking of the position as it obtains at present. At the moment the position is that not only the property tax income from Indian-owned commercial and industrial premises but also the trading income from the consumption of power, water, refuse removal etc. on these premises has been flowing into the coffers of the White-run local authorities. They are in turn responsible for services, not only to these commercial and industrial properties, but also to the residential areas which provide much of the management and labour for these concerns. The inevitable result of this situation, has been that while many White taxpayers and their councillors grumble that the Indian and Coloured residential areas do not provide sufficient rate income to warrant the provision of better services and more amenities to these areas, the Indian Local Affairs Committees all too frequently complain firstly, that the White local authorities who hold the purse-strings do not do enough to provide in-service training for potential municipal employees, such as trainee town clerks, town engineers and the like, and secondly, that the rate income of the residential areas themselves like Chatsworth and now also Phoenix in Durban, is hopelessly inadequate to support independent local authorities. It is therefore small wonder, Mr. Chairman, that the Indians living in a huge area like Chatsworth, where there are no fewer than 200 000 to 250 000 Indians residing and which, incidentally, falls into the constituency of Umlazi, declare that the area is non-viable as a separate local authority. In connection with local Government the annual report of the Department states on page 10 that—

I believe that it is only too frequently forgotten that a growing proportion of the income from commercial and industrial concerns rightly belongs to the Indian population of Chatsworth and Phoenix and the like in other towns, and is only being administered in trust for those areas. The burning question really is—and it is a question that should be resolved at the earliest possible opportunity—to find an acceptable basis of apportionment of these rates and trading incomes. Consequently the investigations by the Yeld and Slatter Committees in respect of the Coloured and Indian communities must be welcomed. We do not know yet when these committees will submit their reports or even whether their recommendations will be made public. However, I suggest that the recent passage by the Natal Provincial Council of an ordinance to amend the Local Authorities Ordinance of that province, has brought this whole matter into public debate.

I do not propose to deal here with the very vexed question of the representation of smaller Indian communities in local authorities, which is the main purport of the Ordinance I have referred to, but only with the aspect of revenue for the larger ones that I have mentioned like Chatsworth and Phoenix and others in the bigger urban areas.

This problem can be tackled in a variety of ways but I want to mention only two. The first would be to leave the daily running of municipal services to local town boards for the various population groups, for the various residential areas or suburbs, but to form an overall metropolitan authority from all the local boards to be responsible for the collection of revenue from trading undertakings and to oversee the distribution of that revenue to its constituent authorities. With this approach, however, one would immediately come up against some serious obstacles. Firstly, there would be the question of representation on this metropolitan authority. This would clearly become a bone of contention. Representation on the basis of unit of head count would place the White local authorities at a serious disadvantage, while one on the basis of revenue produced would have the same effect on the Indian and the Coloured units. Secondly, with the advent of a multi-parliamentary system, which could conceivably lead either to provincial councils as we know them now or to regional authorities in the provinces, the question of jurisdiction over these metropolitan authorities could present a most complicated legal dilemma.

Another possible approach that I have no doubt these committees that I have referred to will also be canvassing, may be to arrive at a system whereby revenue can be apportioned at its source. With the rapid rise in the standards of living and consequently the purchasing power of the Indian people, it would be a relatively simple matter to determine the percentage of turnover a commercial undertaking derives from Whites, Indians and other clientele. In fact, no successful businessman could plan his marketing and advertising policy without regular surveys to determine the composition of his clientele. Similarly, any industrialist can as easily determine which percentage of his labour input into his finished product comes from White, Coloured, Indian or Black workers. On such a basis then the revenue derived from all non-residential properties, whether from taxes or other municipal services, can be equitably distributed among, for instance, the people of Durban itself, of Chatsworth, Phoenix or any other area for that matter. Each residential area or local authority in the making would have the full use of the income derived from the property and the labour of its burgesses while there would be no infringement of the rights of one local authority by another.

There certainly would be other potential ways of overcoming this problem. However, the fact is that this is one of the problems that is seriously retarding the development of democratic local institutions among the Indian people. The sooner these problems are resolved the better for the relations among our various population groups, the good relations which the hon. member for Bezuidenhout also referred to.

Mr. Chairman, the Indian people are embarked upon a challenging road of political self-expression. Within a year or so the South African Indian Council will become a fully elected body. Soon afterwards this will grow into a full-blown parliament. They need institutions in the local government field as well which will produce the political leaders who will be called upon to shape their future.

Mnr. die Voorsitter, die agb. lid vir Umlazi sal my verskoon as ek hom nie volg in sy argumente nie. Ek wil egter getuig dat sy toespraak bewys daarvan lewer dat hy kennis het van sy vak en dat hy belangstel in die sake wat die Indiërs raak.

Dit was vir my interessant om na die ander agb. lede te luister wat deelgeneem het aan die debat. Toe ek na die agb. lid vir Musgrave geluister het, kon ek nie help om te dink dat hy ’n absolute beeld geskep het wat baie ver van die werklikheid af is nie, dat hy baie negatief was en dat daar absoluut niks positiefs in sy toespraak was nie. As hy eerlik wil wees sal hy moet erken dat daar baie dinge is wat die Departement doen waaroor baie positiewe dinge gesê kan word en waarvoor ’n mens dankbaar kan wees.

Die agb. lid vir Umhlanga het hier een waarheid gemeld, as ek hom reg verstaan het. Hy het gesê dat die Indiërs in Suid-Afrika meer sekuriteit het as in enige ander deel van Afrika. Myns insiens is dit ’n baie groot waarheid wat hy kwytgeraak het. Dit alleen is vir die Indiërbevolking baie werd want die klimaat word vir hulle geskep om hulleself te bevorder om in werklikheid van die rykste mense in Suid-Afrika te word. Hulle is as ’t ware beter daaraan toe as die meeste van die Indiërs in die res van Afrika en ook van die Indiërs in hulle land van oorsprong, nl. Indië. Ek wil net aan die agb. lid sê dat die Indiërs nie so dom is om hulself deur die linkse groepe op sleeptou te laat neem om hul sodoende in konfrontasie met die Regering te bring nie. Alles is nog nie volmaak nie, maar die Indiërs weet dat die NP-regering in hul beste belang optree.

Ek wil graag die geleentheid te baat neem om my gelukwense oor te bring aan die Direkteur van Indiëronderwys, wat ek merk vanaand hier is, vir die fantastiese werk wat hy op dié gebied gedoen het. Mnr. die Voorsitter, die verslag van die departement klink soos ’n sprokiesverhaal ten opsigte van wat in ’n baie kort tydperk op hierdie gebied gedoen is. Ek dink dit behoort die dank en waardering van ons almal weg te dra. Ek wil die Sekretaris van Indiërsake gelukwens met sy bydrae en sy toegewydheid tot sy taak. Ek wil die edele Minister ook bedank vir dit wat hy ten behoewe van die Indiërgemeenskap in Suid-Afrika gedoen het. Die Indiërgemeenskap besef dat hulle ’n vriend in die agb. Minister het wat alles doen om na hulle belange om te sien.

Meneer, ek wil graag praat oor die Indiërs in die noordelike distrikte van Natal. Dit is so dat ’n mens Indiërs hoofsaaklik in Natal, Transvaal en in die Kaapprovinsie aantref maar nie in die Vrystaat en die noordelike dele van Natal nie. Dit is die gebied wat as die nuwe republiek bekend gestaan het, en bestaan het uit die distrikte Vryheid, Utrecht, Babanango, Ngotshe en Paulpietersburg. Die algemene idee is dat daar nie Indiërs in hierdie gebied is nie, maar ek wil net aan u vertel, Meneer, hoe dit gekom het dat daar wel Indiërs in hierdie gebied is. Na die inwerkingtreding van Wet Nr. 33 van 1927, is egter geen verdere Indiërs in die gebied toegelaat nie. Die verblyf van Indiërs in hierdie vyf distrikte word deur hierdie Wet bepaal. Op daardie stadium is die Indiërs daar toegelaat indien hulle daar werksaam was. ’n Klein getal van hulle was op die myne werksaam, want dit was die enigste werkgeleentheid wat daar op dié stadium vir hulle was. Hulle is toegelaat om daar te registreer en daar te bly. Hulle en hulle nageslag het deel van die gebied geword—ek praat nou spesifiek van Vryheid. Hulle woon en werk tot vandag toe nog daar. Dit is so dat die mynowerhede onlangs ’n pragtige nuwe skool by Hlobane opgerig het en aan hierdie mense geskenk het vir hul onderwysgeriewe. Die Indiërs wat destyds daar was het ’n keuse gehad. Indien hulle nie daar wou bly nie, het hul die keuse gehad om ’n tydelike permit aan te vra om daar te kan werk, en na voltooiing van hul dienstyd, moes hulle die gebied verlaat. Soos ek gesê het, is die kinders ook op die voorregte van die ouers geregtig en in die geval van enige Indiër wat tydelik wil inkom, moet ’n permit van die departement verkry word. Elke aansoek word streng op meriete oorweeg. Dit is hoe die situasie vandag nog is in daardie gebied.

Soos ek reeds gesê het is die meeste van die Indiërs in die noordelike distrikte in die myne aldaar werksaam. Volgens die verslag van die departement is daar maar omtrent 188 Indiërs werksaam in ons myne. Dit wil vir my voorkom asof hulle nie baie geneë is om in die mynbedryf in te gaan nie. Die Indiërs in die Vryheid-gebied is geregtig om enige werk aldaar te doen. Hulle hoef nie noodwendig in die mynbedryf te gaan nie. Die Indiërs is nie na hierdie gebied gelok nie omdat die werkgeleenthede hoofsaaklik in die myne bestaan het, terwyl daar ook veeboerdery was. In teenstelling met die groeipunte soos Richardsbaai, Newcastle, Pietermaritzburg en Durban, is werkgeleenthede skaars in hierdie gebied. Dit is nie ’n snelontwikkelende gebied nie. Soos ek gesê het, bestaan ontwikkeling daar hoofsaaklik op die gebied van mynbou en boerdery. Die neiging het in die laaste tyd by die Indiërs ontstaan om byvoorbeeld daagliks vanaf Dundee te pendel na Vryheid. Dundee is omtrent ’n driekwartuur se ry vanaf Vryheid. Hulle werk dan in Vryheid en keer in die aand terug. Ek wil ’n beroep op die agb. Minister doen om hierdie neiging sterk teen te gaan omdat daar baie sterk beswaar is van die Blanke sowel as die Swart inwoners van Vryheid. Hierdie Vryheidgebied grens aan kwaZulu en Nongoma, die vorige hoofstad, en Ulundi, die huidige hoofstad van kwaZulu is maar ’n kwessie van ’n uur se ry van Vryheid af. ’n Mens kan dus verstaan, dat indien daar op die oomblik werkloosheid onder die Indiërs bestaan, daar ’n groter mate van werkloosheid onder die Swart mense in daardie omgewing bestaan. Baie van die Blankes en Swart mense in hierdie gebied moet die gebied weens gebrek aan werkgeleenthede verlaat. Hulle gaan dan na Richardsbaai, Newcastle of die Randse kompleks. Die Regering het baie positiewe stappe gedoen vir die opheffing van die Indiërgemeenskap in die hele gebied. Ons besef ook dat die Regering werkgeleenthede vir hierdie mense probeer skep het. Opleiding word voorsien sodat hulle dwarsdeur die Republiek, behalwe in die Vrystaat en in hierdie klein kolletjie, kan gaan werk. Ons voel dat hierdie gebied as ’n voorkeurgebied uitgehou moet word vir die Swart mense en die Blankes aldaar.

Ek wil daarop wys dat beskerming en volop geleenthede dwarsdeur die Republiek aan die Indiërs gegee word. Die Indiërs wat plus minus 3% van die bevolking uitmaak het werk en besigheidsgeleenthede in die hele Republiek, behalwe hierdie genoemde gebiede. Die Indiërs kan deel hê in die groei van Suid-Afrika maar ons beskou die noordelike distrikte as voorkeurgebiede vir die Blankes en die Zoeloes en die min werkgeleenthede wat daar beskikbaar is, moet deur hulle benut word. Die mense van die gebied maak sterk beswaar daarteen dat die gebied ook vir Indiërs oopgestel word. Die houding van die mense aldaar is dat alvorens daar oopstelling van die Vrystaat vir Indiërs oorweeg word, oopstelling van die gebied ook nie oorweeg behoort te word nie.

Die Indiërs wat wel daar is, is gewaardeerde inwoners van die gebied, maar ons wil egter verhoed dat daar instroming en oorstroming van die gebied sal plaasvind wat die werkgeleenthede vir die Blankes en die Swartes sal verminder. As ’n mens die onsekerheid van die Indiërs se voortbestaan en die behoud van hul besittings in die res van Afrika in ag neem, dan het die Suid-Afrikaanse Indiërs baie om voor dankbaar te wees. [Tyd verstreke.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Vryheid and the hon. member for Umlazi dealt with certain specific subjects. The hon. member for Vryheid dealt with the position of the Indian community in the northern districts of Natal and I am sure the hon. the Minister will reply to him on that particular aspect.

The hon. member for Umlazi made an interesting speech this afternoon because obviously the whole position of the Indian community in relation to local authorities is a matter which is receiving consideration. As far as the position in Natal is concerned, the Natal Provincial Council passed legislation recently, after having reached agreement and consensus among the White, Coloured and Indian communities, concerning local authorities. Let us hope that the Government will in due time give its sympathetic consideration to that legislation because it was brought about on the basis of consensus and agreement.

They rejected the proposals by the Provincial Council.

The Nationalist Party in the Provincial Council voted against the proposals. I am aware of that.

The NMA.

Yes. Well, the NMA is fully entitled to discuss this matter. But the basis of the negotiations was a plan that was submitted to the Indian community, the respective and respected leaders of the Indian community and of the Coloured community, for their views. The legislation was then passed on the basis of agreement reached among the parties concerned on that particular issue.

The other aspect that was also mentioned by the hon. member for Umhlanga and by the hon. member for Musgrave was the position of the central business districts and the situation as it affects the Indian community. In Durban some Indian businessmen are having to pay front men substantial sums of money so that they may trade in certain areas. That is why the recommendation of the Riekert Commission of Inquiry is of great importance, and I refer to page 225, paragraph 5.27. This recommendation refers to free trade area and the Commission recommends that—

This is a vitally important recommendation and I hope that when the hon. the Minister replies to the debate he will indicate whether the Government has accepted that recommendation of the Riekert Commission. It is a recommendation which, if accepted, will bring a great deal of relief to a number of Indian businessmen who at present have to use front men in the business districts of Durban.

There is one particular aspect on which I should like to address the hon. the Minister and this concerns the welfare services and the benefits paid to the Indian community. When one looks at the estimates before the Committee one sees that approximately R18 million has been allocated to social pensions, and in this regard I should like to point out that the Government has not yet taken any meaningful steps to narrow the pensions gap and the gap in respect of the payment of certain benefits. I do believe that the time is long overdue for definite, concrete steps to be taken by the Government to eliminate the tremendous gap which exists regarding pensions and other social benefits, and especially the means test, in respect of the amounts payable to the various race groups.

The figures for 1976 show that Whites received R72 per month whereas Indians received an amount of R38,50 in respect of social pensions, the difference being R33,50 per month. Despite slight percentage increases for the Indian community, as at 1 October 1978 White social pensions amounted to R88 per month whereas the Indian received only R47,75, a gap of R40,25. In real terms, therefore, we see that the gap is increasing. As from 1 October 1979 the pension for Whites will be increased to R97 per month, whereas for Indians the pension will be increased to R54 per month, the gap then being R43 per month. In real terms, therefore, the gap is increasing. I think this is a difficult situation which the Government is faced with. One cannot increase these amounts overnight to bring about parity. But I believe if we are going to work towards parity that gap will have to be reduced at a far greater rate before anything like parity can be achieved.

As far as the means test is concerned, this is another matter I should like to bring to the attention of the Committee, because in this particular respect the Government appears to abide by the old ratio basis of 4:2:1. As far as the means test is concerned, therefore, we have a situation in which the Indian can qualify for social benefits if he possesses only 50% of what the White pensioner is allowed. In consequence we have a means test which precludes the White social pensioner from obtaining any form of social benefit if his income exceeds R82 per month for a single person. For an Indian, this amount is only R41 per month. These figures have remained unchanged for a long period of time and I do hope that the hon. the Minister will find ways and means of narrowing this gap in applying the means test There seems to be no good reason why this gap should remain, as it has done for a number of years, especially when one considers the increase in the cost of living and the improvement in the standard of living among the Indian community. It is unreasonable to expect that this gap should remain as it is.

I have mentioned the actual gap in benefits and pensions paid, and there is also a difference in the other amounts paid. For instance, an Indian war veteran only qualifies for an additional R5 per month whereas a White war veteran gets an extra R10 per month. There is an attendant’s allowance for those suffering from ill-health which in the case of Whites is R10 per month and in the case of the Indians only R5 per month. One can list a large number of figures to illustrate the tremendous gap which exists both in terms of the means test and in terms of pensions and benefits paid. Quite a number of pensioners are involved. As far as the Indian community are concerned, the latest available figures show that 31 237 persons receive social pensions, e.g. old age, war veteran and disability pensions and pensions for the blind. There are a number of persons receiving these pensions and one knows that it is Indian custom and tradition to look after their senior citizens and their aged. This custom is still very much in force despite the Westernization that has taken place among a large number of the Indian community. The fact remains, however, that because of the present cost of living, because of the available housing facilities, it is not possible for these large families to live together as they did in the past. They have been moved from certain areas to other housing schemes where only limited accommodation is available and this has made it exceedingly difficult for them to look after their aged relatives as is traditional among the Indian people.

Despite this it is interesting to note that there are still only very few Indians in old age homes, viz. 137, according to the latest figures available. This figure will unfortunately increase because of the housing situation and also because of the economic position which necessitates many of them having to obtain some form of relief and some form of assistance from the Government They have to make application to the Department of Indian Affairs to get some form of relief.

I have no wish to be purely destructive and critical in regard to the social benefits paid by the Government. I realize that the Government is attempting to narrow the gap but unfortunately in real terms this is not happening. I should therefore like to appeal to the hon. the Minister to give his full support to suggestions made in the past regarding a contributory scheme in terms of which it will be possible for people to contribute to a scheme on the level of income they receive when they reach the age of retirement. Those persons will then receive retirement benefits in accordance with their level of income and not on the basis of race. Unfortunately, under the existing dispensation, we shall always be open to extreme criticism from many quarters because our system is based purely on race. If we had a contributory scheme the basis would then be the level of income. [Time expired.]

Mnr. die Voorsitter, die agb. lid vir Umbilo is bekend vir sy baie goeie kennis van welsynsdienste en pensioene. Hy het ook hier vanmiddag aangetoon dat hy ’n goeie begrip het vir die Regering se probleme, nl. dat die verskille wat tans bestaan nie sommer oornag uitgewis kan word nie. Die agb. lid het ook erken dat dit Regeringsbeleid is om die verskille wat wel bestaan met die verloop van tyd uit te skakel.

Ongeveer ’n jaar gelede het dieselfde pos onder bespreking gekom en etlike sprekers aan hierdie kant van die Komitee het die opregte uitnodiging aan Indiërleiers gerig om met die Regering saam te werk i.v.m. die grondwetlike bedeling, om sodoende die Indiër politieke inspraak te gee, politieke deelname te gee en politieke medeverantwoordelikheid te gee in die stryd om voortbestaan in Suider-Afrika. Vir die heel eerste keer in die geskiedenis word die Indiër in die posisie gestel om oor die lotgevalle van die bykans 760 000 Indiërs self te besin, om self hulle toekoms te verseker. Hulle sal in die posisie geplaas word om hulle eie eerste minister te kies en om hulle eie minister van onderwys te kies. Nêrens in die wêreld word hierdie geleentheid of naastenby ’n soortgelyke een aan ’n minderheidsgroep gebied nie. Nêrens word ’n minderheidsgroep, ras of volk se voortbestaan gewaarborg nie. Nêrens word ’n minderheidsgroep se taal, kultuur en godsdiens gewaarborg nie. Maar in Suid-Afrika is die NP-regering aan die bewind en hierdie veelsgevloekte onderdrukker van menseregte en sogenaamde Wit rassiste is bereid om aan ’n minderheidsvolk in die konstellasie van Suid-Afrikaanse volkere, te wete, die Indiërvolk, hulle voortbestaansreg te waarborg. Die NP-regering doen dit ook vir elke ander bevolktingsgroep in Suid-Afrika. As ons dan kyk na wat die Indiërleiers doen met hierdie geleentheid wat hulle het en die kanse wat aan hulle gebied word, is ’n mens in ’n mate teleurgesteld. Uit ’n toespraak van ’n lid aan hierdie kant het dit geblyk dat hulle aansluit by Gatsha Buthelezi se Inkatha-beweging, die sogenaamde Zoeloe-kultuurorganisasie. Hulle verwerp uit die staanspoor die Regering se voorstelle voordat daar nie meer besonderhede beskikbaar is nie. Die jongste verwikkeling is dat hulle eers ’n verkiesing wil hou om ’n mandaat van die Indiërkiesers te verkry. Die vraag wat onwillekeurig by ’n mens opkom, is wat die verkiesingsplatform gaan wees. Gaan dit die een van vrugbare onderhandelinge met die Regering wees of gaan dit die een van konfrontasie met die Regering wees? Die optrede van die Indiërraad die afgelope jaar en veral dié van sy voorsitter, dr. Moolla, wat gedreig het om te bedank as die raad nie onbepaald verdaag nie uit protes teen die Regering se voorstelle, dui op niks goeds nie. Ek wil vir dr. Moolla en die Indiërraad sê dat daar nie plek is vir sulke politieke kinderagtighede nie. Hierdie soort van optrede kan verhoudings net verder vertroebel en nie verbeter nie. Ek dink dit het nodig geword dat daar vir die Indiër baie reguit en padlangs gesê word dat die Wit man, en by name die Afrikaner, in Suid-Afrika is om te bly, dat die Wit man nie onder ’n Swart meerderheidsregering kan en sal leef nie. As die Indiërleiers dink so iets is moontlik en dat hulle onder ’n Swart meerderheidsregering sal kan leef, maak hulle, myns insiens, ’n helse fout.

Orde! Die agb. lid moet daardie woord terugtrek.

Ek trek dit terug, Meneer, en sê dat hulle ’n baie groot fout begaan. As dr. Motlana vir Blanke studente sê dat daar nie plek is vir Blanke minderhede onder ’n Swart meerderheidsregering nie, dan is daar nog minder plek vir Indiërs en Bruinmense. Dit het tyd geword dat die Indiërs sy vrees vir die Swart man afskud en onbevange ’n standpunt inneem. Ons durf nie toelaat dat die een volksgroep of ras die ander afdreig en met ’n heimlike vrees vervul nie. Die Wit man het die Swart man nodig, en omgekeerd. Net so het die Indiër die Wit man nodig, en omgekeerd. Die Wit man het egter ook die Bruinman nodig, en omgekeerd. Slegs wanneer ons mekaar se interafhanklikheid erken, kan ons onbevrees saambou aan die toekoms van Suid-Afrika.

Ten slotte wil ek weer eens in alle opregtheid en erns Indiërleiers uitnooi om vreesloos te besin oor die grondwetlike voorstelle sodat daar sinvol en in belang van die Indiërs onderhandelings kan plaasvind. Of ons nou van Oosterse of Westerse oorsprong is en of ons van Suid-Afrikaanse oorsprong is, bly die feit nog soos die Engelse dit uitdruk: „When the chips are down, you are alone.” Dan is al maatstaf wat aangelê word die mate van jou Afrikagebondenheid. Daarom moet ons nou onderling ons heil uitwerk terwyl ons nog die tyd en die geleentheid het. Ek wil dus by hernuwing ’n uitnodiging rig aan Indiërleiers om met die Regering saam te werk oor die nuwe grondwetlike bedeling sodat daar vir ons almal in Suid-Afrika ’n beter bedeling vir die toekoms uitgewerk kan word.

Mnr. die Voorsitter, ek wil graag my dank en waardering uitspreek aan agb. lede aan weerskante van die raad vir hulle bydraes tot hierdie debat. Wanneer ’n mens ’n begrotingspos bespreek wat met die verhoudingspolitiek in Suid-Afrika te doen het, moet ’n mens verwag dat daar ’n bietjie politiek gepraat sal word, dat daar gewys sal word op verskille in ons benaderings tot hierdie probleme en dat daar selfs gepoog sal word om ’n paar vlieë af te vang. Dit het vandag gebeur, maar ek dink ek kan sonder vrees vir teenspraak sê dat die bespreking in die algemeen van ’n hoë gehalte was en stel ek dit dan ook besonder op prys. Ek is veral dankbaar vir die bydraes van lede aan hierdie kant van die Raad. Hulle het nie soos my agbare vriende aan die oorkant in baie gevalle met bokhael geskiet en gehoop dat hulle iets sou tref nie, maar het beredeneerde betoë gelewer in belang van goeie volkereverhoudinge in Suid-Afrika. Hulle het gewys op die verantwoordelikheid van die Blankegemeenskap en op dié van die Indiërgemeenskap. Hulle het ook gewys op die gemeenskaplike verpligtinge wat ons het teenoor Suid-Afrika wat ons almal se vaderland is. Ek wil hulle in die besonder hiervoor bedank en sal later terugkom by hulle bydraes en antwoord op punte wat hulle geopper het.

However, I would now enter into a little discussion with my friend, the hon. member for Musgrave. He started off with politics and with some generalizations. This always surprises me, because for a man with his background and training one would expect him to be more deductive in his approach to the facts and not to come with these inductive generalizations which have very little support in fact. For example, he accused me of gilding the lilly, saying that I make too much of the positive achievements of my Department and the Government which I have the honour to represent. What does he want me to do? Pretend that we do nothing?

I said you were entitled to it, but you must not say you are doing them a favour. It is their right.

It is a very interesting suggestion and I will come to that immediately. The hon. member wants to talk politics. I concede that Indians have certain rights under this Government and I want to concede that they have not yet achieved everything they are entitled to. But we are making progress. If my hon. friend agrees with me that they are entitled to certain rights under this Government, I want to ask him pertinently whether they were not entitled to the same rights when their fate was largely the responsibility of the Natal Provincial Council until this department took over in 1961. Can he stand up and say that they were making progress similar to the progress they have made under this Government and that they were in the same position and had the same prospects in those days when the Natal Provincial Council, his people, were responsible for the Indians and not this Government and not this Department? It is easy to level criticism, but when you live in a glass house, you do not throw stones.

It is a relative argument.

No. I wish to give one example, Indian education. I wish to repeat something I said before, namely that when I became Minister of Indian Affairs, the first time I visited the University of Durban-Westville an elderly and experienced Indian, known for his great concern for Indian education, told me that in those days the central Government subsidized the Natal Provincial Council £5 per child per year for Indian education. And the Natal Provincial Council made a profit on it!

That’s got nothing to do with it.

It has a lot to do with it When you live in glass houses you do not throw stones!

But I had nothing to do with it either.

Do not tell me that we are not doing right by the Indians and that we are not giving them what they are entitled to. I will give you one fact. I will not enlarge upon this. [Interjections.] My hon. friend started this. He must not squeal now.

But it has nothing to do with me.

I want to tell you what the position was with Indian education in Natal in 1967, which was before my Department’s policy could have its effect. As far as matriculation was concerned, there were 2 087 candidates of whom 798 passed which represented 38%. Only 222 or 27% of the 38% got matriculation exemption. That was before the effect of Indian education under the Department of Indian Affairs could be felt and they were still struggling with the incubus of the old Natal Provincial Council. Then we come to 1977 when all the children in the matriculation class had had their education throughout under the auspices of the Department of Indian Affairs. Instead of 2 087 Indian children in matric there were 4 871; instead of 798 passes in matric, 4 315 passed; instead of 222 obtaining university exemption, 1 557 were exempted; and last year 4 979 candidates wrote matric and 4 495 or 90,08% passed their matriculation examination—what a brilliant achievement!—and 1 645 received their university exemption. Compare that with what their position was in education and in everything else under the Natal Provincial Administration’s responsibility and see where they have come to today.

But you were part of that administration too!

Of course I was. I have the courage to say I was guilty and that my people were guilty. Will you say the same?

Yes, I say it is a bad record.

There you are, the hon. member said they had a bad administration. I am glad the hon. member admits it.

It does not mean anything.

Then why raise the point?

I did not raise it, you did.

No, Mr. Chairman, I want to remind my hon. friend that he said that I must not gild the lily because we are only giving the Indians what they are entitled to. What I am showing the hon. member now is that they were also entitled to the same things when their education was under the Natal Provincial Administration. We are doing infinitely better. We are showing concrete results with which nothing they achieved can compare. Therefore, if I gild the lily I am only doing what is necessary in the public interest which is to show how much more efficient and successful this Government is than any administration under the Opposition parties. That is my right. The hon. member’s right is to try to catch flies and I must just come back with the truth and the facts.

The hon. member said that we are denying the Indians job opportunities. How dare the hon. member say that? What is left of job reservation is disappearing. In the case of the Indians what is of more importance is to see what progress they have made. When this Department took over the administration of Indian Affairs, Indians were largely engaged in the retail trade. Even today 80% of the economically active Indians in the Transvaal are retail traders. They were hotel workers and sugar farm labourers and beyond that there was very little for them to do. But my Department—and I who am now so lightly, so gaily accused of denying them job opportunities—have a policy of diversifying the economic activities of the Indian people. I just want to give a few examples, I have a whole long list here, of the progress we are making. According to a manpower survey, No. 12, conducted by the Department of Labour, which gives an exposition of the total manpower resources of the Republic and of South West Africa as at 29 April 1978, the economically active Asians in certain trades and occupations were distributed as I will show in a minute. As a matter of interest and by way of comparison I will also give the figures for three years before that, as they were in 1975. Professional, semi-professional and technical workers totalled 15 728 in 1978. Three years before that the figure was only 11 564 and 30 years ago, before we came into power, it was probably 20 or 30.

Business suspended at 18h30 and resumed at 20h00.

Evening Sitting

Mr. Chairman, when we adjourned I was pointing out the trouble we have taken to diversify the economic activities of our Indian population. I have a long list here but I was giving just a few examples. The number of professional, semi-professional and technical employees increased from 11 500 to 15 700 from 1975 to 1978. Clerical employees increased from 40 000 to 47 000, and employees engaged in transportation, delivery and communication increased from 11 000 to 13 000. Operators and semi-skilled workers in building and/or construction work increased from 678 to 2 274. Supervisors and other skilled and semi-skilled employees increased from 11 000 in round figures to 12 500. Now I want to give you the number of artisans. The number of trades is steadily increasing. In the metal and engineering trades the number of artisans grew from 538 to 778 and the number of apprentices from 73 to 243. In the electrical trades the number of apprentices grew from 77 to 246. In the furniture trade the number of artisans grew from 382 to 826 and the apprentices from 34 to 71. I now want to give you an example of the new fields’ opening for Indians. In the diamond cutting, jewellers’ and goldsmiths’ trades there were no artisans or apprentices three years ago, but in 1978 there were 81 artisans and 22 apprentices. So one can go on. I can also point out that our Indian people are playing an important part in the semiskilled and skilled labour fields. They are becoming artisans in Iscor and in our steel industry and now new avenues are opening for them extensively in Sasol II and Sasol III at Secunda. All this I can name, but my hon. friend comes with a bland statement that they are being denied work opportunities in South Africa when, contrary to this, new opportunities are being created for them every day.

Do they have the same opportunities as Whites? That is really the question.

Particularly in the Orange Free State!

Well, that position is being established.

It has not yet.

Of course, but it is an ongoing process. In the days when the party which the hon. member claims to have represented, was in power there was no progress. Now there is real progress, and that is the real difference between this Government and previous governments. We are moving forward and we are achieving things in a process of development and advancement.

There is still discrimination.

The next question the hon. member raised was the Group Areas Act. He claimed that the Indians had experienced nothing but misery and suffering and discrimination under the Group Areas Act. The facts are that we had tremendous resistance against separate residential areas while we were doing the work at the outset. More and more of my Indian friends have become reconciled to the idea of separate residential areas, and more and more they are beginning to express their appreciation of the new quality of life they are experiencing in their own residential areas with their own institutions and customs and, what is more, their own undisputed, registered title deeds to their own homes and property. This is one of the great successes of the National Party policy.

The Group Areas Act is?

The residential areas that are being established under the Group Areas Act. They have towns and cities in South Africa today which compare favourably with anything that the Whites have, whereas before they were living in little lean-to’s behind their shops in the slummy parts of our towns. It has been a complete revolution for the better and I will always speak up for the benefits that have come to the Indian people under the residential aspects of the Group Areas Act.

The hon. member quoted figures to show that so many more Indians had been resettled than Whites. But, of course, that had to be so because 98% of the people who were resettled under the Group Areas Act would have had to be resettled in any case, even if there had been no Group Areas Act. They would have had to be resettled under the Slums Act or under the Community Development Act. They were living in squalid conditions. One could not rehabilitate individual homes because whole areas of towns had to be replanned and revived. The benefit of the Group Areas Act is that while under the Slums Act or the Community Development Act there is no obligation upon the Department of Community Development to finance these people in order to get alternative housing, under the Group Areas Act, when people have to be moved, there is an obligation upon the Government to provide them with alternative housing. Which one should I use then? I would have done exactly the same and the Government would have had to do exactly the same under the Slums Act and the Community Development Act as they did under the Group Areas Act. But the difference is that there is a real advantage to the persons who are moved under the Group Areas Act—they get alternative housing.

There is a race criterion under the Group Areas Act That is very different from the Slums Act.

The hon. member refers to the race criterion, but it happens to be a fact that the Coloured and Indian races were far behind in housing; their people were living predominantly in the slums. That is a coincidence. It would have had to be done in any case. That is the fact that I have been struggling to get into the heads of the PFP Opposition ever since I have had this job, and I am really having difficulty doing it.

It was altruism, was it?

I am having difficulty penetrating their minds. I am sure the intelligence is there; the problem is to get through to them. [Interjections.]

The hon. member spoke about housing in general. I just want to give a few figures—and now I am gilding the lily, the hon. member would say, but these are facts. I want to give a few examples of the shortages that still exist and of what is being done to overcome those shortages. In Pietermaritzburg there is a shortage today of 2 300 houses. In 1977 we had already approved the building of 2 038 houses in Pietermaritzburg. The tenders have gone out, which means that within a year or so there will only be a shortage of about 100 houses. That will be overtaken with ease in the following years and then we will be on top of the problem in Pietermaritzburg.

On the Witwatersrand there is a shortage of 1 900 houses. During 1977-’78 we approved schemes for 3 000 houses against the shortage of 1 900. All these approved schemes have not yet had the necessary money allocated to them in order to proceed, but that will be done with the minimum of delay. They have been approved, the schemes have been worked out by the municipality and the department to a large extent, and the money will be forthcoming. Within three years there will be no housing shortage for Indians on the Witwatersrand either.

In the case of Durban there is still a shortage of 11 800 houses, but 5 804 houses have been approved and some of them are already out on tender. We are still waiting for the allocation of funds which we will get in respect of 8 372 houses that have been approved.

Does that include the 5 804?

5 804 houses are already under tender and there are 8 372 already approved schemes, which gives us a total of 14 176 houses approved and under tender in 1977-’78 against a shortage of 11 800. Now, Sir, must I not gild the lily?

Why did the hon. Minister express shock when I said there was a housing shortage? There is a very grave housing shortage.

I am shocked and therefore I am doing something about it. This Government is doing more to solve the housing problem than all the previous governments in the history of South Africa put together. We are spending more money in one year than they did in 40 years. That shows that while I am shocked, my shock leads to practical results and not to untrue political arguments.

It is not an untruth at all.

Does the hon. member want to ask a question?

Has the money already been allocated for the 5 800 houses that have gone out to tender?

The money is available. [Interjections.]

My hon. friend on the other side also asked me about the Attorney-General of Transvaal’s apparent announcement that he is stopping prosecutions. That, of course, is a question that one should put to the Minister of Justice as I am not responsible for it. But I can tell the hon. member that the Attorney-General has made inquiries from my department about the housing shortage, and we have prepared a reply which should reach him tomorrow or at the utmost the day after. But I cannot see how the Attorney-General can postpone prosecutions indefinitely when the law is being broken. However, at the rate we are building houses on the Witwatersrand, I have reason to hope that it will be possible to rehouse these people as the orders become effective. The court is not ordering their immediate ejection but is giving them six months’ to a year’s extension, and I am even willing to see whether that extension can even be prolonged.

That is helpful.

Of course. If one talks to the Department of Indian Affairs one would always get a true answer.

The hon. member is behind the times.

The hon. member for Bezuidenhout apologized for his absence, but both he and my hon. friend had a lot to say about the lack of effective consultation with the Indian people. I want to say at once that there is very effective consultation with the Indian people but it is done to a large extent on a personal basis between the Minister, the excellent officials whom I am privileged to have in my department and the Indian people. But I want to admit at once that the formal machinery for consultation is inadequate. It is indescribably better than it was before the Indian Council existed. Then there was absolutely nothing. But it is not yet what we would like to see, and that is why we have come forward with the idea of a completely new constitutional dispensation in South Africa that will indeed give the Indians equal status in consulting with the Whites, the Coloureds or the Blacks in South Africa.

Over the dispensation itself?

They will be fully consulted on the dispensation and they will have every opportunity to put their points of view. And as far as their representative bodies are concerned, we will consult with them there too. We cannot do more. The hon. member can complain that there is not adequate consultation because the machinery is ineffectual. At the moment the only body in South Africa that can change the constitution is the White Parliament of South Africa, and for that reason the White Parliament of South Africa must accept the responsibility and take the initiative. It must decide on the nature of consultation and it wants to consult fully because it wants the agreement and the cooperation of these people. My hon. friend must accept that. We accept our responsibility but we cannot act as if there was a constitution in South Africa different to the one that we received from the British government in 1909.

Living in the past as always.

Mr. Chairman, my hon. friend asked me about the proposed election date. I have discussed this matter with the leaders of the Indian community through representatives of all the parties in the Indian Council. We have problems; they have problems.

Tell us about them.

Ours is a practical problem. Although my department has really done wonders together with other people in planning a new, enlarged electorate for South Africa, we are having practical difficulties. Mr. Justice Fannin who was the chairman of the Delimitation Commission has completed his work. With the remarkable assistance of the Department of the Interior, the work for the division of the 36 constituencies into polling districts has also been completed. I expect that the two proclamations dealing with the constituencies and the polling districts will be issued within a few weeks, in June.

And then, Sir, the registration of Indian voters is now approaching 300 000 and, apart from the Whites in South Africa, this is the best we have ever had for any purpose. It is quite remarkable. The parties, however, inform me that they need more time. There is a supplementary registration every four months and they are asking for more time to register more Indian voters. They have asked me not to have the election in November, as I agreed to do originally, but to postpone it until next year.

There are also other practical problems. These mostly concern the supplementary voters’ lists. The provision in the law that there must be one supplementary voters’ list drawn up after the general list is finalized makes it very difficult to have the election in November. With the agreement of, I am sure, all the Indian people concerned and certainly all those represented on the council, the election will probably be held in March next year. This will give the political parties of the Indian people more time. They are only establishing those parties now in any real form. They have never had anything like this before and we must appreciate the fact that this is a new venture for my Indian friends. If they need more time, I am glad to give it to them, especially when it also solves the few practical administrative problems we are experiencing.

Mr. Chairman, my hon. friend also read out a particular letter in regard to the housing shortage. I cannot help him in that regard but if he is prepared to identify the case I can go into it However, I think he did it by way of illustration.

Yes, it was by way of illustration.

Sir, he also spoke about Sastri College. Although he was very charming about it, he virtually suggested that I had given the wrong information. He did not suggest that I had done so deliberately. Sir, the position in regard to Sastri College is that it is situated in the central area of Durban. There are not enough Indian children in the central area of Durban to sustain Sastri College. It is true that there has been a slight increase in their number of pupils. However, the fact is that only 38% of the children in Sastri College come from the central area of Durban; the rest come from afar. As we are developing our schools, inevitably those who can be serviced by schools closer to their homes, will attend those schools and Sastri College will then become almost empty. This is not only the experience of Sastri College. There are other schools in the central area of Durban that are in the same position; the Ghandi School is only 30% full, St. Anthony’s has only 38% and the Hindu Tamil School which only caters for children up to Std. 6 has only 18%. Thus the decline of Sastri College is almost inevitable.

At this stage I want to pay tribute to the late Mr. Sastri for the tremendous contribution he made to Indian education. At the time when Indian education was cruelly and unforgiveably neglected, he was one of the leaders of voluntary associations which established communal schools for the Indian people. He was a pioneer of Indian technical education in Natal. He did not succeed in that field to the same extent as with ordinary education. However, he set the ball rolling; he inspired the Indian community by setting an example. A committee was established under a Mr. Christopher and this eventually formed the M. L. Sultan Technikon in Durban. But the M. L. Sultan Technikon is as much a monument to Mr. Sastri as any other educational institution for which he was responsible. The Indian community admits that that is so. Sastri College is a tailor-made extension of this wonderful technikon that we have for our Indian people. This technikon is one of the great success stories of South African education. It is at present bursting at its seams and is giving technical education to 9 000 to 10 000 young people this year. It has to expand and this is the most suitable place for expansion. However, I undertake that in the existing Sastri College, plaques will be put up at a suitable place, not only to commemorate the name of Mr. Sastri but also to remind the generations that have followed him of the contribution that he made to Indian education. I want to go further. If my Indian friends approach me and say to me that there is a suitable educational institution which can carry the name of Mr. Sastri, I will consider it and on merit shall be glad to make it possible for Mr. Sastri’s name to be connected again with an important Indian educational institution. I am, however, afraid that progress and the needs of the Indian people make it impossible for me not to incorporate Sastri College into the M. L. Sultan Technikon.

Sir, my hon. friend also referred to Phoenix township. The position in Phoenix is that the amenities under the law of 1974 have to be provided as the provision of housing develops. One cannot have a similar position to that in Soweto and in certain other areas where the housing completely outstripped the amenities, which was most unfortunate. I am very glad to say that another 13 schools—four high schools and nine primary schools—will be virtually completed in Phoenix this year. They are about to be put into use; they are under construction and some of them will be completed before the real need arises. They will be completed in anticipation of the housing efforts.

As far as general facilities are concerned, we have already allocated R4,8 million for Indian areas. Of this amount, a considerable sum will be used at Phoenix. We have already agreed to use money made available by the Department of Community Development for the construction of 29 soccer fields, 3 cricket fields, 8 pavillions, 2 halls, 2 swimming baths, 4 community centres, 1 large library and 12 playgrounds for little children in Phoenix. Mr. Chairman, I think my hon. friend will agree with me that that really is progress.

Meneer, ek het nou klaar die agb. lid vir Musgrave se punte behandel. Hy het met bokhael geskiet en het so wyd moontlik probeer tref. Met die antwoorde wat ek aan hom verskaf het, sal dit blyk dat ek ook geantwoord het op baie van die sake wat deur ander lede geopper is.

Ek wil graag my agb. vriend vir Rissik hartlik bedank vir sy besondere opbouende bydrae. Hy het die filosofie van die Regering gestel. Hy het gewys op die erns en die opregtheid van die Regering. Hy het dit gedoen op ’n wyse wat oortuig het dat ons hier te doen het met ’n eerlike poging …

Een van die swakste toesprake wat hy nog ooit gemaak het.

… om volkereverhoudinge in Suid-Afrika te verbeter wat die toekoms van ons kinders asook die kinders van alle rassegroepe in ’n vreedsame Suid-Afrika sal verseker. Ek wil my opregte dank teenoor hom uitspreek vir sy bydrae.

I am glad to see that the hon. member for Umhlanga is here because I know he has found it difficult to be here. I want to thank him for his positive approach. He at least had the frankness to get up and to admit that some of the things we are doing for the Indian people are good and positive. I appreciate such an attitude and I hope my hon. friend from Musgrave will take note of how one should approach these problems in Parliament. [Interjections.]

The hon. member for Umhlanga and the hon. members for Musgrave, Umbilo, and Bezuidenhout all raised the question of the central business districts.

Al daardie agb. lede het die kwessie van sentrale sakesentra in ons stede geopper. Die agb. lid vir Umhlanga het veral gekla oor die nominee-stelsel wat hy die front-stelsel noem.

Meneer, ek wil nou iets aangaande die CBD’s sê. Ek kan nie baie in die verband sê nie. Soos u egter bewus is, het die Riekertkommissie aanbeveel dat dele in die sentrale sakesentra van ons dorpe en stede afgebaken moet word. Dit moet afgebakende gebiede wees. Dit moenie sommer wild oopgegooi word nie; daar moet afgebakende gebiede wees wat oop sal wees vir alle mense om handel in te dryf. Daardie voorstel word nog deur die Regering oorweeg. Die besluite van die Regering aangaande die aanbevelings van die Wiehahn-verslag is alreeds in ’n Witskrif bekend gemaak. Daar sal ook ’n Witskrif oor die Riekert-verslag ter Tafel gelê word. Ons het egter nog nie ver genoeg gevorder om sodanige Witskrif beskikbaar te stel nie omdat daar nog besluite geneem moet word. Een van die sake wat die Regering nog nie afgehandel het nie, is die kwessie van die sentrale sakedistrikte. Daar is probleme. Ons kan nie sakedistrikte oopstel en dan wit olifante maak van groot bestaande handelsentra in ander wyke nie. Ons moet ook in ’n ander verband veral versigtig wees, en dit wil ek beklemtoon. Op die oomblik sal die sakesentra van ons groot stede, as ons hulle sou oopgooi, net na die Blankes en die Indiërs in Suid-Afrika gaan. Hulle is die enigste mense wat die ervaring het en wat kapitaalkragtig genoeg is om op enige betekenisvolle wyse te ontwikkel aan die sakesentra van die stede. Ons het egter ook ander gemeenskappe, bv. die Kleurlinggemeenskap. As die tyd aanbreek dat die Kleurlinge ook aanspraak maak op regte in daardie sentrale sakedistrikte, sal dit te laat wees. ’n Indiër is ’n eienaardige mens. As hy eenmaal ’n stuk grond besit, verkoop hy dit nie weer maklik nie. Ek weet, ek het baie met hulle te doen. Ons sal dan vind dat die Kleurlinge ’n agterstand het wat hulle nie sal kan inhaal nie en dan sal verwyte na ons geslinger word dat ons nie vir die Kleurlinge gesorg het nie. Ek sê nie dit sal die saak onmoontlik maak nie, maar maak net melding van die soort probleem wat ons sal moet oorweeg wanneer ons die saak bespreek. Die Witskrif sal een van die dae gepubliseer word en dan sal agb. lede die antwoord kry, nie van my nie, maar van die Departement van Beplanning en die Omgewing, wie se verantwoordelikheid dit is om die saak te beslis.

Will that White Paper become available during the course of this session?

I sincerely hope so, we are doing our best.

My hon. friend for Umhlanga also spoke about problems in Phoenix and Stanger. I think I answered those questions in general when I dealt with the hon. member for Musgrave. He spoke about telephones in the Indian areas, and admitted that in some areas the position is quite good in this respect. All I can tell him is that the Department of Indian Affairs is in constant touch and consultation with the Post Office. We have standing arrangements for discussion and planning in order to improve the position in the Indian areas. Generally that position is not satisfactory but it is improving and I hope that there will be a further improvement when we meet again next year.

Die agb. lid vir Newcastle het ’n tien minute toespraak gelewer, die tema waarvan was dat ’n nuwe era vir Suid-Afrika ontsluit het, en ek is bly hy het dit gedoen. Ons aan hierdie kant het baie redes om ons daarop toe te spits dat hierdie land van ons, Suid-Afrika—ons ken geen ander nie—’n gelukkige, vreedsame tuiste moet bied aan al sy mense. Ons dink diep en emstig daaroor; ons konsentreer op ons probleme. Soos u nou gesien het, stel ons ’n parlementêre gekose komitee aan bestaande uit alle partye om saam te besin oor die toekomstige grondwetlike bedeling en die toekomstige beplanning vir die mense van Suid-Afrika. Ons glo dat daar ’n spesiale rol in Suid-Afrika is vir die Blankes, die Kleurlinge en die Indiërs want ons woon saam in wat bekend staan as Blanke Suid-Afrika. Ons kan nie van mekaar geskei word nie want daar is nie vir ons aparte territoriale gebiede wat ons kan gebruik as basisse vir aparte state nie. Wat die Swart mense betref, is die posisie effens anders, want geskiedkundig het hulle hulle eie politieke geografiese basisse en daarom kan die antwoord in hulle geval verskillend wees. Wat dié drie groepe, Blankes, Kleurlinge en Indiërs betref, moet ons ons koppe bymekaar sit en ’n antwoord vind. Ons is besonder dankbaar vir die agb. lid vir Newcastle wat met soveel visie, soveel geesdrif en ook met soveel oortuigende vertroue gepraat het van wat ons in Suid-Afrika kan bereik as ons opreg en vasberade is en as ons mekaar probeer vind in plaas daarvan dat ons mekaar verstoot.

Die agb. lid vir Bezuidenhout het om verskoning gevra omdat hy nie teenwoordig is vanaand nie. Hy het my gevra of ek dink dat ek my plig doen as Minister van Indiërsake. Meneer, as ek nie my plig gedoen het nie, waar sou die lelie gewees het wat ek kon verguld? Die agb. lid daar anderkant sê dat dit nie verkeerd is dat ek dit doen nie, maar hy voel darem ’n bietjie jaloers omdat ek dit so baie doen. Ek kan net sê dat as dit nie was vir my Departement wat by my staan en dit wat ek doen moontlik maak nie, en as dit nie was vir die Kabinet en die Regering wat vir die geld en die beleid sorg nie, sou ek dit nie kon doen nie. Ek is oortuig daarvan dat die Indiërbevolking onder hierdie Regering alreeds ’n nuwe bedeling tegemoet gegaan het. Hulle het ’n nuwe waardigheid, nuwe vryheid van beweging tussen die provinsies, nuwe geleenthede om sake te doen, nuwe behuisingsvoorregte, nuwe opvoedingsregte, hetsy primêr, sekondêr, tersiêr, tegniese en baie ander geleenthede wat hulle nog nooit tevore in Suid-Afrika gehad het nie. Meneer, nog is het einde niet. Ek stem saam met my agb. vriende aan hierdie kant sowel as aan daardie kant, dat daar nog baie werk is wat gedoen moet word. As die Here my spaar, sal ek doen wat ek kan om daardie werk te bevorder. Ek sal altyd dankbaar wees vir die kritiek en vir die aansporing van my agb. vriende in hierdie Komitee, ook van die Opposisie, om my op my tone te hou. Die werk is ontsaglik en dit moet gedoen word.

Die agb. lid vir Bezuidenhout het ook gepraat oor die hervestiging van handelaars. Dit lyk of mense dit nie besef nie, maar vir jare reeds, vandat ek Minister van Indiërsake is, nog voordat ek Minister van Gemeenskapsbou geword het, het ek die saak opgeneem met die destydse Eerste Minister en met die Departement van Beplanning sowel as die Departement van Gemeenskapsbou onder die voorsitterskap van die destydse Eerste Minister. Ons het toe besluit dat dit nie nodig was om Indiërs in die stede van Transvaal, die hele Natal, behalwe Ladysmith waar die saak te ver gevorder het, en die hele Kaapprovinsie te hervestig onder die Groepsgebiedewet nie. Dit beteken dat meer as 2 700 Indiërsakemanne nou weet dat hulle nie langer hervestig gaan word onder die Groepsgebiedewet nie. Soveel vir sy ideologiese kwessie waarvan hy netnou gepraat het. Waar dit egter nodig is, sal hulle net soos die Blankes, Kleurlinge of wie ook al, die Slumswet sowel as die Stadshemuwings bepalings van die Wet op Gemeenskapsbou moet gehoorsaam. Waar die behoefte bestaan en waar hulle in ongure toestande leef, sal ons ’n plan moet bedink om daardie plekke waar hulle woon en daardie gedeeltes van ’n dorp of stad wat hulle betrek het, te hemuwe en om die geaardheid daarvan te verander.

Onder die Groepsgebiedewet sal 2 700 Indiërs egter nie langer hervestig word nie, behalwe in die Transvaal op die platteland. Vanaf 1886—ek dink dit is die jaar van die Goudwet—kon Indiërs nie grond besit in die Transvaal nie. Die gevolg was dat hulle nie die aansporing gehad het om hulle eiendomme wat hulle bewoon het en wat hulle vir winkels gebruik het, te verbeter nie. Dit was nooit hulle eiendomme nie. Hulle is uitgebuit deur verhuurders, ook Indiërverhuurders. Ja, ongelukkig is hulle deur hul eie mense uitgebuit. Die gevolg is dat daar ontsierende Indiërsakebuurtes op baie van ons plattelandse dorpe in die Transvaal is, en dit moet skoongemaak word. Ek wil dit nie in daardie gevalle onder die Slumswet doen nie. Ek wil dit ook nie onder die Stadsvemuwingsbepalings doen nie. Ek wil die verantwoordelikheid aanvaar onder die Groepsgebiedewet om te sien dat hulle hervestig word met goeie geleenthede om voort te bestaan en dat hulle nie ontwrig word en bankrot speel in die proses nie, want baie van hulle is arm mense. Daarom gaan ek voort met die hervestiging van Indiërhandelaars op die platteland. Daar is nie meer baie wat hervestig moet word nie. In Bloemhof, Bronkhorstspruit, Carolina, Coligny, Ermelo, Heidelberg, Klerksdorp, Koster, Lydenburg, Middelburg, Nylstroom, Potchefstroom, Rustenburg, Standerton, Zwartruggens, Ventersdorp en Wolmaranstad is dit reeds gedoen. En die Indiërs is tevrede. [Tussenwerpsels.] Hulle is nou dankbaar. Hulle het weerstand gebied. Daar is een uitsondering, nl. Lydenburg, waar daar probleme is. Ons hou dit egter dop en as dit nie opgelos word nie, sal ons ’n plan maak. Die res is almal dankbaar. Meneer, weet u hoe hulle baklei het toe ek die slums van Pageview in Johannesburg wou opruim. Sekere agb. lede het my aanhoudend daarvan beskuldig dat ek wreed en onmenslik is, en aan my gevra waarom ek dit doen. Dit was ’n skreiende slum en nou dat ons besig is om dit op te ruim, vind ons dat byna die helfte van daardie wonings nie eens toiletgeriewe gehad het nie, en dit in die hartjie van Johannesburg. Ons maak dit nou skoon, en daardie Indiër-sakemanne is nou hervestig in Oosterse Plaza ’n artikel 19-gebied onder die Groepsgebiedewet. Dit kos ons R18 miljoen om daardie mense te hervestig. Maar, Meneer, is dit ’n suksestorie? Hulle het my hoftoe gevat by meer as een geleentheid omdat hulle nie wou weggaan nie. Nou is hulle daar en nou wil hulle hê ek moet nog sulke geleenthede vir hulle skep. Ek besoek daardie plek, dit wemel van ekonomiese bedrywighede en dit is voorspoedig. Saterdae is daar om en by 15 000 mense wat by die Oosterse Plaza inkope doen. Op weeksdae is hulle net so besig. Ek was onlangs daar met ’n leier van die Indiërgemeenskap wat my veral beveg het. Ons het op die boonste verdieping gestaan en afgekyk op die wandelhal. Terwyl dit daar onder wemel van die mense, het ek na hom toe gedraai en gesê: „Joe, jy moet darem erken jou Minister is darem nie altyd verkeerd nie.” En hy antwoord my: „Meneer, ek buig my hoof in skaamte.” Dit is tipies, Meneer. Hierdie Indiërhandelaars wat in die slumgebiede op die Transvaalse platteland is, sal ook nog dankie sê vir wat ons doen. Alles is feitlik gereed, selfs die gebiede wat nog nie afgehandel is nie. Dit is nou al die geval dat in Bethal, Lichtenburg, Louis Trichardt, Pietersburg, Piet Retief en Zeerust die kontrakte sover gevorder het dat ons dit nie meer kan kanselleer nie. Daar bly slegs drie groot handelaars in Bethal oor, 34 handelaars in Potgietersrus en 16 in Schweizer-Reneke waar die werk nog in die beginstadium is. Dit sal ook binnekort afgehandel word tot voordeel van die Indiërs en tot die verfraaiing van die betrokke dorpe, waar die Indiërs nie weens hulle eie skuld nie, maar vanweë die toepassing van beleid in die verlede in agterbuurt-omstandighede woon.

Die agb. lid vir Umlazi het ’n vraag gestel in verband met aparte munisipaliteite. Dit is deel van ons beleid in die nuwe grondwetlike bedeling wat ons in gedagte het. Dit is reeds gepubliseer en rus op twee pilare. Die een pilaar is grondbesit Die frase wat ons gebruik in die dokument wat gepubliseer is, is: „Ons strewe in die toekoms na ’n grondbesittende demokrasie in Suid-Afrika.” Die mense van die demokrasie moet grondbesitters wees. Die tweede pilaar is gesonde plaaslike bestuur. Ons aanvaar die drie vlakke van regering en ons sê dat een van die belangrikste die lae vlak is, d.w.s. die intieme vlak waar die Regering intiem met sy mense verkeer, nl. die plaaslike bestuur.

Ek wil aan my agb. vriend sê dat plaaslike bestuur gevolglik belangrik is. In die geval van die Kleurlinge het ons alreeds die Yeld-kommissie aangestel en in die geval van die Indiërs, die Slater-kommissie, onder die voorsitterskap van die voormalige Provinsiale Sekretaris van Natal, om op die saak in te gaan. Die Yeld-kommissie se verslag is al openbaar gemaak en ek het baie onlangs die verslag van die Slaterkommissie ontvang wat ’n stimulerende verslag is. Dit open nuwe moontlikhede vir ons. Ek voel net dat ek die volgende moet sê, want ek het dit gesê die dag toe ek die portefeulje Indiërsake aanvaar het: Ons kan nie aparte munisipaliteite stig as hulle nie ekonomies lewensvatbaar, ekonomies bestaanbaar is nie. Ons moet daaraan dink om vir hierdie mense hul eie nywerheidsgebiede te gee; ons moet daaraan dink om vir hulle behoorlike sakegebiede te gee en ons moet daaraan dink hoe hulle kan deel in die bydrae wat hulle maak tot die inkomste en die bestaan van die gemeenskaplike stadsgebiede. Dit is van die groot probleme wat eers opgelos moet word voor ons kan aangaan om plekke soos Phoenix of Laudium of Lenasia in aparte munisipaliteite om te skep. Hulle moet eers ekonomies lewensvatbaar wees en hulle sal moet kan deel in die rykdomme wat hulle vir die totale plaaslike gemeenskappe van Suid-Afrika help skep. Ek meen ons is op pad na ’n oplossing en ek hoop dit sal binnekort moontlik wees om ’n verklaring in die verband te doen.

My agb. vriend vir Vryheid het veral oor die Indiërs in die noordelike distrikte van Natal gepraat. Ek wil hom bedank vir sy bydrae; dit was baie interessant. Dit is ’n geskiedkundige toestand waarmee ons in Vryheid te doen het. Die Swart en Wit inwoners van Vryheid het redes waarom hulle die aard van daardie gebied wil behou en waarom hulle dit ’n voorkeurgebied wil maak vir die ou inwoners van Vryheid. Dit is egter baie moeilik om vandag so ’n wet in Suid-Afrika toe te pas. Ons sukkel daarmee. Ek kan egter aan my agb. vriend sê dat ons sal probeer om dit toe te pas in belang van die inwoners van Vryheid met die noodsaaklike menslikheid en Christelikheid wat van ons verwag word. Die agb. lid weet dat ons dit reeds in die verlede gedoen het nl. dat as daar gevalle voorkom waar daar probleme is, hy baie welkom is om namens die mense van Vryheid na ons te kom. Ons kan dan koppe bymekaar sit en ’n oplossing probeer soek. Ek weet hy het in belang van sy kiesers opgetree. Ek waardeer dit en ek verseker hom van my medewerking om op ’n regverdige basis hul probleme op te los.

The hon. member for Umbilo also spoke about the central business area with which I have dealt. He was worried about the closing of the gap as far as social pensions are concerned. Sir, I can assure my hon. friend that the Government is committed, fully committed, to closing that gap. That is our policy and we are doing this as fast as we can.

It will have to be accelerated far more than it has been hitherto.

It will be accelerated and in so far as particular types of pensions are concerned this can be done almost immediately. But I want to issue a word of warning. The hon. member talks about closing the gap. Do you know, Sir, what the closing of the gap in the case of social pensions alone for all races in South Africa, will cost?

I know it will cost a lot of money.

A lot of money means nothing. It will cost R637 million just to make social pensions equal! Then there is still the salary gap that has to be closed, and I do not know what that will cost.

I said “ultimately”.

That is not something that can be done overnight; the South African economy simply cannot take it.

A contributory scheme would solve the problem.

A contributory scheme would solve the problem, if my hon. friend would tell me how to administer such a scheme when we still have a large number of illiterate Black people for whom we are responsible. I made several appeals in Parliament for a contributory pension scheme but I always had to exclude certain categories of workers in South Africa. That was done with the full agreement of the United Party in those days because it was administratively impossible to include them, and that problem has not yet been solved. I agree with my hon. friend but it is not practical politics at the moment. As I have said, the closing of this gap will be done as quickly as possible.

As far as subsidies to institutions are concerned, we have a new formula as from this year that will increase the subsidies considerably. The cost of maintaining an individual in such an institution will be the yardstick, rather than just an arbitrary figure. Unfortunately, I do not have the figures with me at the moment, but they are quite remarkable and are further proof of the sincerity of the Government.

I also want to say that we have a committee of senior public servants under the chairmanship of the Treasury to which Indian Affairs and Coloured Relations make their contributions. Every year when the budget is considered that committee takes a special look at this question of the gap in salaries and pensions in order to see what can be done in order to improve the position from year to year. The hon. member made a point of the real difference increasing but that is because he is increasing it percentage-wise. As one increases percentages the base becomes larger in respect of the non-Whites and the rate at which that gap will widen will slow down until it goes into reverse gear.

I acknowledged that; I said so.

I am glad you did. The point is that we are determined to close the gap and as fast as circumstances will permit we shall do so.

My hon. friend asked me about old-age homes for Indians. There are two old-age homes in existence, very good homes. Another is being planned at the moment and will be under construction quite soon. But what is interesting, Sir, is that old-age homes for Indians are never fully occupied. We have problems with homes for the deaf and homes for the blind, but the homes for the aged are never fully occupied because our South African Indians are an example to all of us. They still look after their parents. They like to keep their parents in the family and they treat them with tremendous respect. I always say that the measure of a people’s civilization is the way in which they care for their old people. On that basis, Sir, the Indian people are probably one of the most civilized communities we have in South Africa. So there is no crying need for old-age homes for Indians today. We are actually ahead in this field and we shall try to keep ahead and not fall behind.

Die agb. lid vir Kimberley-Suid het ’n baie interessante en stimulerende toespraak gehou. Die agb. lid is nie nou hier nie, maar hy het die Indiërgemeenskap gewaarsku dat hulle nie op konfrontasie met die Regering of die Blanke gemeenskap moet afstuur nie. Ek dink hy was baie verstandig om dit te doen, Meneer. Dit is ’n waarskuwing wat ons aan alle gemeenskappe kan rig. Ek dink dit sal noodlottig vir Suid-Afrika wees as ons op ’n rassegrondslag mekaar begin konfronteer, mekaar begin uitdaag, mekaar wil probeer vervolg en mekaar na benede wil sleep. Daar is te veel dinge in die land wat van gemeenskaplike belang is dat ons op so ’n rampspoedige koers moet afstuur. Ek wil my agb. vriend vir Kimberley-Suid gerusstel: Ek dink nie die Indiërs wil konfrontasie met die Blanke gemeenskap hê nie. Die Indiër is ’n persoon wat kan beding. Hy „bargain” baie graag; hy glo daarin dat hy moet beding. Hy doen dit op so ’n sterk manier as wat hy kan. Ek meen dat hy miskien partykeer ’n bietjie te ver gaan in ’n poging om sy saak te beding. Ek persoonlik glo ten volle dat ons Indiërgemeenskap ’n uiters verantwoordelike gemeenskap is, dat hulle ’n uiters toegewyde gemeenskap is aan Suid-Afrika en dat hulle groot rede het om Suid-Afrika dankbaar te wees. In die hele wêreld is daar nie ’n Indiërgemeenskap wat so voorspoedig en so gelukkig is soos die Indiërgemeenskap in Suid-Afrika nie en geen verantwoordelike Indiër sal dit ooit ontken nie. Een van my kollegas hier agter my het gevra of ons enige probleme het met Indiërs wat Suid-Afrika wil verlaat, en ek moet sê nee, ons het nie probleme nie. Daar was ’n tydperk—en ek het dit stopgesit—waar ons Indiërs gesubsidieer het om Suid-Afrika te verlaat. Ek dink net twee van hulle het in die latere jare van die geleentheid gebruik gemaak om ’n vakansie op Staatsonkoste in Indië deur te bring en toe het hulle weer teruggekom Suid-Afrika toe. Hulle wil nie Suid-Afrika verlaat nie.

Ons verkeer gedurig onder druk deur die Indiërleiers om meer Indiërs hier toe te laat, soos bruide, ou mense, kinders, en ons is bereid om in ’n sekere mate toegewings te maak, maar ons wil nie die volkepatroon in Suid-Afrika meer ingewikkeld maak nie. Maar die aandrang is daar om na Suid-Afrika te kom, soos bv. dié van die Indiërbevolking van Mosambiek, wat vandag bitter ongelukkig onder die seëninge van kommunisme moet lewe. Dit is vir my ’n riem onder die hart dat ons hier in Suid-Afrika nog ’n toevlug skyn te wees vir mense wat in toestande van ellende en onderdrukking verkeer, en ’n tuiste is waar mense gelukkig kan wees en waar mense ’n toekoms kan bou.

Meneer, ek wil baie dankie sê vir die interessante bydraes wat van weerskante gelewer is. As ek miskien nog nie op iets geantwoord het nie, is daar nog tyd. Agb. lede kan my daaraan herinner en ek sal my bes doen om die oorsig uit die weg te ruim.

Mr. Chairman, it is always a pleasure to listen to the hon. the Minister. He is a very articulate man; he tells a very plausible story as he holds his hands together and talks about the new era for South Africa. I could not help thinking, Mr. Chairman, just how times have changed recently. There is no doubt at all that there is a new attitude from that side of the House and from that hon. Minister. But, Sir, when one listens to speeches like that of the hon. member for Rissik who told us how wonderful everything was for Indians in South Africa at the moment, one casts one’s mind back to the old NP attitude to the Indian community of South Africa which still shows through. The speech of the hon. member for Vryheid was another example of this. One thinks back to the repatriation scheme. When this hon. Minister talks about the removal of Indian businessmen he becomes very persuasive when he says that these were slum removal schemes or slum clearance schemes. Well, Sir, with great respect to that hon. Minister, in many cases they were not, they were straight group areas ideology.

I happen to know the facts.

He says he knows the facts, but let us talk about Pageview. It is always extraordinary to my way of thinking that the hon. the Minister talks about removals from Pageview as being a slum clearance scheme.

Yes.

Then, Sir, the normal procedure with slum clearance schemes is urban renewal. That community, in fact, is allowed to live there …

Yes, but with no responsibility to the community concerned.

… but you improve their situation. I am not quite sure what the hon. the Minister means by “no responsibility to the community concerned”. I shall tell the hon. the Minister just what I think he may have achieved with the removals from Pageview. Of course, Pageview is still under review and there are a lot of people living in Pageview at the moment who do not want to move. Whatever the hon. the Minister might say about slum clearance, if they were really sincere on that side of the House in their talk about giving the Indian people a square deal, instead of moving those people to Lenasia which is already bursting at the seams with overcrowding, he would be talking about an urban renewal scheme in Pageview.

But let us look at that slum clearance scheme in 14th Street where for decades an Indian community had traded very happily. It was an exciting trading area; people used to come from all over the place to find bargains. Then at the cost, as the hon. the Minister has said, of R18 million they built the Oriental Plaza, which finally having got off the ground is a viable scheme at last.

At last! From the very start.

But Sir, many people went broke in the meantime; many people were bankrupted in the interim. One looks at a trading community like that old 14th Street community, which was a happy community, and one remembers the times when those individuals trading in 14th Street were thrown out on the pavements and their goods were dumped there with them. They were forcibly removed from 14th Street, pictures appeared in the press throughout the world, and R18 million was spent. And what have we achieved for that R18 million? I ask what we have achieved? We have moved those Indian traders something less than 2 km—probably about 1 km—from where they were originally at a cost of R18 million. All I have to ask that side of the House is this: Do they sleep better in their beds at night because those Indian traders were forcibly removed? Have they come to ideological solutions for South Africa?

I sleep much better.

Well, the hon. the Minister says he sleeps much better. [Interjections.] I am very pleased to hear it. We seem to have some sort of sleeping draught operating on the other side of the House because all those Indian traders were forced to move to a different trading area. [Interjections.] When I think of that sort of expenditure I think of how one could have constructively spent that money on improving the quality of life for those people. My specific plea on Pageview at the moment to the hon. the Minister—one is never quite sure whether one should address him in his capacity as Minister of Community Development or Minister of Indian Affairs—is to leave Pageview alone.

Tonight you have no option.

If you want to do anything with Pageview, follow a policy of urban renewal but allow that community to stay in Pageview.

Listening to the hon. member for Rissik who said that everything is so wonderful in the approach of the NP today, one finds it difficult to realize how that NP has been dragged, kicking and screaming, into a more reasonable and a more rational frame of mind with regard to the Indian people. It has been dragged away from the repatriation scheme.

By whom?

You know, it upsets these hon. members to be told about their past, but I can assure them that we have long memories. We are quite prepared to give credit where credit is due, and we believe that some credit must be given. But let us talk about this removal of Indian businessmen in the Transvaal. The hon. the Minister has said that 2 700 Indian businessmen need not be moved.

Will not be moved.

“Will not be moved”—that is very, very good indeed, Sir. Could I suggest to the hon. the Minister that if we were really a rational society, a normal. society, there would have been no question in the first instance of moving them, of putting them in a situation where they as Indians had to go somewhere else. We should have thought of a society where one would have regarded them as normal human beings who could go where they wanted to. Now I refer to the speech of the hon. member for Vryheid, a speech which was an absolute affront to the Indian community. One of the greatest affronts to the Indian community at the moment is that they as South Africans still cannot locate themselves in Northern Natal and still cannot locate themselves in Vryheid. They still cannot locate themselves in the Free State. Why not, Sir? [Interjections.] If this is the new era, the new dream for South Africa, why are Indian people not allowed in the Free State? Can I ask the hon. members who come from the Free State exactly why Indians are not going to be allowed to come into the Free State? Can I ask that hon. member for Vryheid why they are not allowed into Northern Natal at the moment, if this new dream is actually a reality? One appreciates that the hon. the Minister has his problems, he has his difficulties. When I look at some members of his caucus I wonder how he has managed to get as far as he has.

[Inaudible.]

Orde! Wat het die agb. lid daar gesê?

Ek het gesê hy is ’n bitterbek.

Die agb. lid moet dit terugtrek.

Ek trek dit terug, Meneer.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I should like now to come to a particular subject [Interjections.] He says I must leave the Free State alone, Sir, but, unfortunately, there is not much I can do about the Free State at the moment. I want to come specifically to a section of the report, page 21, which deals with group areas, and this specifically has to do with Cato Manor. The hon. the Minister knows full well the difficulties in regard to Cato Manor, and I quote from a newspaper, an independent newspaper called The Citizen, which quotes Mr. Reddy, chairman of the executive of the Indian Council who said—this is February 10—

The Indian community feel very strongly indeed about Cato Manor. They feel desperately that Cato Manor should be available for occupation by Indians, if necessary in terms of Government legislation, as an Indian group area.

They have never demanded from me that the whole of Cato Manor should be declared an Indian area.

I admit that I am going by a newspaper report, but from my own discussions in the past with Mr. Reddy I am absolutely certain that Mr. Reddy believes that Cato Manor should be available for Indian occupation. I would be very surprised indeed if the hon. the Minister is going to say that Mr. Reddy does not feel this way. The majority of Indian people in Durban believe that Cato Manor should be made available for Indian occupation.

Why do you talk about things of which you have no first-hand knowledge?

The hon. the Minister says that I have no first-hand knowledge, but I have on many occasions spoken to members of the Indian community. It is always extraordinary to me that the story I get from them is always different from the story I am told by the hon. the Minister as to what the Indian people feel and do and want in South Africa. But I can only say what I find and I can only say that the Indian community in Durban want Cato Manor. I want to hear from the hon. the Minister whether he is willing to contradict me on that.

You don’t know what you are talking about.

What I am saying is that there have been many pleas for Cato Manor and if consultation with the Indian people in this new era and under this new dispensation is to mean anything at all, it will have to mean more than the word “consultation”. The word in itself is meaningless because it means listening and acting on one’s discussions. I believe this is one of the great failing of our dealings with the Indians. [Time expired.]

Mnr. die Voorsitter, die agb. lid vir Orange Grove het hier ’n onstuimige politieke toespraak gehou en het sekere sake geopper waarop ek nie graag wil antwoord nie. Ek dink die agb. Minister sal graag self daarmee wil handel. Ek sal egter in die loop van my toespraak terugkom na ’n paar sake waarna hy verwys het.

Met die inwerkingtreding van die nuwe konstitusionele bestel wat deur die Regering in die vooruitsig gestel word, sal die kroon gespan word op die pad van politieke ontwikkeling van die Indiër-Suid-Afrikaner. Die nuwe grondwet sal ’n uitstaande baken wees op die pad wat die Indiër-Suid-Afrikaner 120 jaar gelede begin wandel het toe die eerste Indiër as plaasarbeider tot hierdie land toegelaat is.

Die agb. lid vir Orange Grove en sy party sê egter dat hulle ’n „long memory” het. Ek wil vir hom sê dat ons ook ’n goeie geheue het. ’n Mens kan seker met reg daarop wys dat langs hierdie pad van ontwikkeling die Indiër-Suid-Afrikaner dit ook nie altyd baie maklik gehad het nie. As gevolg van die diskriminerende optrede deur vorige VP-regerings is die Indiër inderdaad die geleentheid ontneem om so te ontwikkel dat hy sy seggenskap oor sy eie sake kon verkry. Trouens, die voorgangers van die agb. lid wat so pas gaan sit het, het nie eers hulle weg oopgesien om die Indiërs in Suid-Afrika as Suid-Afrikaners te aanvaar nie. Dit was ’n NP-regering wat in 1961 besluit het dat die Indiërs as ’n permanente deel van die bevolking van Suid-Afrika aanvaar moet word. Dit was onder leiding van dr. H. F. Verwoerd dat verklaar is dat daar ’n weg gevind moet word om dit moontlik te maak dat elke bevolkingsgroep in Suid-Afrika ’n eie toekoms kan hê sodat die verskillende bevolkingsgroepe saam kan leef op ’n grondslag van gelykheid. Dit het nie in hulle tyd bestaan nie. Ook aan die Indiër-Suid-Afrikaner moes gelyke geleenthede gegee word om ’n volwaardige gemeenskap van hul eie op te bou, om kontak met die ander leiers van Suid-Afrika te maak en om ’n volwaardige rol in die land te speel.

Met die stigting van die Departement van Indiërsake in 1961 was die politieke ontwikkeling van die Indiërgemeenskap dan ook een van die take wat aan die nuwe departement opgedra is. Maar deels as gevolg van die beleid van vorige VPregerings was daar geen liggaam of organisasie binne die Indiërgemeenskap wat so verteenwoordigend was dat die departement dit as spreekbuis van die Indiërgemeenskap kon beskou nie. Daarom het die Regering in 1963 ’n groep van 100 Indiërs na ’n konferensie in Laudium by Pretoria genooi vir samesprekings oor die stigting van ’n liggaam met wie die Regering kon onderhandel. By hierdie konferensie het die Regering dit duidelik gestel dat dit sy voorneme is om met verloop van tyd ’n verteenwoordigende Indiërraad in die lewe te roep, wat uiteindelik uit verkose verteenwoordigers sou bestaan met wetgewende en administratiewe magte ten opsigte van alle aangeleenthede wat die Indiërgemeenskap regstreeks sou raak. Met hierdie doel voor oë is daar dan ook by die konferensie besluit dat ’n Nasionale Indiërraad as ’n tussentydse liggaam gestig sou word totdat dit vir die Regering moontlik sou wees om die vorm van verteenwoordiging te verbeter.

Die instelling van die Nasionale Indiërraad is op 3 Februarie 1964 aangekondig, asook die name van die eerste 25 lede. Aanvanklik was die doel van hierdie liggaam om as administratiewe orgaan te dien, om die nodige kontak en raadpleging tussen die Regering en die Indiërgemeenskap te bewerkstellig en om dan later tot ’n statutêre liggaam te ontwikkel. Die Nasionale Indiërraad sou dan ook verder as die Suid-Afrikaanse Indiërraad bekend staan.

Die instelling van die Suid-Afrikaanse Indiërraad was ’n stap van wesenlike belang in die politieke ontwikkeling van die Indiër-Suid-Afrikaner ten spyte van die feit dat agb. lede aan die oorkant hierdie feit vergeet. In die plurale gemeenskap van Suid-Afrika word politiek vandag al meer gesien as die versoening van botsende belange. In hierdie sin was die instelling van die S.A. Indiërraad dus die gevolg van die Regering se emstige begeerte om die behoeftes en die aspirasies wat eie is aan die Indiër in die Republiek te akkommodeer. Eiebelang is ’n oorwegende faktor in die politiek en daarom het die Nasionale Party geglo dat elke bevolkingsgroep sover moontlik die geleentheid behoort te hê om sy eie belange na te streef. Daarom was die instelling van die S.A. Indiërraad dus die Regering se eerlike erkenning van hierdie strewe by die Indiërs. Nêrens in die wêreld en nêrens in Afrika is hierdie erkenning aan die Indiërgemeenskap buite Indië verleen nie. Geen vorige VP-regering was bereid om hierdie erkenning aan die aspirasies van die Indiër-Suid-Afrikaner te verleen nie. Dit leer ons uit die geskiedenis.

Op 26 Maart 1968 is die Wet op die Suid-Afrikaanse Indiërraad aangeneem. Volgens hierdie Wet kon 25 lede in die raad aangestel word deur die Minister. Gedurende 1972 is die Wet gewysig en is die getal lede vermeerder van 25 tot 30. Daar is ook toe bepaal dat ’n aantal lede in die raad verkies sou word en dat die res aangestel sou word. Daarom sou die volgende raad dus uit 30 lede bestaan waarvan 15 verkose lede sou wees. Dit was egter nog altyd die vooropgesette doel van die Regering dat die lede van die raad uit verkose lede moes bestaan wat deur middel van ’n algemene verkiesing verkies sou word. Daarom is ’n proklamasie in 1976 uitgereik wat die registrasie van Indiërkiesers moontlik gemaak het. Soos die agb. Minister vanaand aangekondig hef is 72% van die geskatte getal registreerbare Indiërkiesers tans geregistreer, wat ’n merkwaardige prestasie is aangesien elke Indiër self moes toesien dat hy geregistreer word.

In die Kieswet vir Indiërs van 1977 is daar voorsiening gemaak vir die verkiesing van lede vir die Indiërraad. Die bepalings van hierdie Wet stem in wese ooreen met dié waarvolgens die verkiesing van lede vir die Volksraad en die Provinsialeraad geskied.

Die Wet op die S.A. Indiërraad is in 1978 verder gewysig en het bepaal dat die volgende Indiërraad uit 40 gekose en vyf aangestelde lede sal bestaan. Soos die agb. Minister aangekondig het, is die afbakening van kiesafdelings reeds afgehandel en sal dit eersdaags aangekondig kan word. Die feit dat die agb. Minister vanaand kon aankondig dat alle voorbereidsels getref is en dat binne die volgende aantal maande ’n algemene verkiesing gehou sal kan word deur die Indiërgemeenskap van Suid-Afrika, is ’n merkwaardige prestasie.

Mnr. die Voorsitter, binne 20 jaar nadat die Indiër as ’n permanente deel van die Suid-Afrikaanse gemeenskap deur die Nasionale Party aanvaar is, sal die Indiër-Suid-Afrikaner dus die geleentheid kry om sy burgerreg uit te oefen en self daardie mense te kies wat na sy belange in hierdie land op nasionale vlak sal omsien. Dit is ’n unieke prestasie gemeet aan alle wêreldstandaarde.

Kyk ’n mens dus terug op die pad van die politieke ontwikkeling van die Indiër in Suid-Afrika sien jy hoeveel die Indiërraad reeds vir hulle eie mense verkry het en getuig dit van die sukses van die Nasionale Party se beleid van evolusionêre verandering. Dit getuig van die eerlike en opregte poging van die regering om vir die Suid-Afrikaanse Indiërs, met hulle samewerking, ’n toekoms te skep sodat die volke van Suid-Afrika langs mekaar vreedsaam kan saamleef op die grondslag van gelykheid.

Daarom is dit vanaand ons opregte vertroue dat ten spyte van die agitasie van baie van die politieke partye in Suid-Afrika die Suid-Afrikaanse Indiërgemeenskap ook die moed sal hê om nee te sê vir die pad van verandering deur revolusie wat net smart kan bring vir die mense van Suid-Afrika. [Tyd verstreke.]

Mnr. die Voorsitter, dit is my aangename voorreg om die agb. lid vir Geduld geluk te wens met sy bydrae in hierdie besondere debat. Dit was ’n mooi oorsig van die ontwikkeling in ons hulpprogram teenoor hierdie besondere bevolkingsgroep.

Die agb. lid vir Orange Grove het verwys na gebeure van die outydse Nasionale Party en hy het die vraag gevra of ons rustig in ons beddens slaap. Ek kan hom die versekering gee dat dit nie saak maak of daarop neerkom of ek rustig in my bed slaap nie maar dat ek hom kan verseker dat die Indiërbevolking van Standerton beslis mstiger in hul beddens slaap. In die agb. lid se gryse voorgangers se tyd het hulle, die Indiërs, van jaar tot jaar oorstroom geraak en het hulle begin slaap met ’n bekommemis dat die water hulle weer gaan oorstroom en daar is niks aan gedoen nie. Daar is aalmoesies aangedra as die mense gered moes word. Ja, aalmoesies is aangedra. Vandag is daardie mense in ’n trotse woonbuurt woonagtig met ’n trotse gemeenskap en in ’n sakesentrum waar hul skitterend doen. Dit is nie mense wat ’n gesprek soos kinders voer nie, maar ontwikkelde volwasse mense wat ’n standpunt kan stel.

Die agb. lid vir Musgrave praat van dié sake. Dit is waar en ons wil dit erken dat ons geskiedenis van ontwikkeling deurspek is met onsmaaklikhede en soos die agb. lid dit uitgedruk het, „assault on human dignity”. Maar dit is gebeure wat oor die wêreld heen plaasvind. Dit vind vandag nog plaas. Daar is sekere gebeure wat in Rhodesië en ook teen die goeie burgers van Suidwes plaasvind byvoorbeeld moorde, doodslag en aanslae en dit kan nie aan ons drumpel hier gelê word nie. Ons kan nie daarvan ontkom nie. Dit is daar. Wat doen ons tans om riglyne vir hierdie mense te sny en daaruit te kom? Daarom moet ons liewer aansluit by die gedagte van die agb. lid vir Umhlanga waar hy gesê het, kom ons wees eerlik met onsself en laat ons eerlik wees oor dié standpunt waarvoor ons staan. Ek wil vir die agb. lede daarop wys dat saam met hierdie pragtige verslag van die Dept. van Indiërsake moet ons ook die verslag van die Sekretaris van Openbare Werke en die memorandum deur die Minister van Openbare Werke lees en saam daarna kyk, want dan kry ons ’n indruk van die omvang van die aktiwiteite en die bestuurspatroon wat daar gereël word om hulp te verleen ten opsigte van Indiërgemeenskappe. Ek wil eintlik ’n bietjie by die onderwys aspek stilstaan. As ons daarna kyk dan sien ons die groot werke wat voltooi is. Volgens die program in die verslag van die Dept. van Openbare Werke vind ons dat daar veertien skole ten bedrae van R5,9 miljoen opgerig is en dat elf skole, ensomeer aangepak is. Hierby wil ek bysit die Stanwest Hoërskool vir die Indiërgemeenskap van Standerton waaraan meer as ’n half miljoen rand bestee is. Dit is die netjieste skool van alle skole, Blank en Nie-blank in Standerton. Dit is die trots van daardie gemeenskap en oor die standaard van die werk daar kan ek professioneel getuig. By twee geleenthede waar ek opgetree het as inspekteur van onderwys om die standaard van hul Engels mondeling te gaan toets moes ek die punte wat daar toegeken was aan die besondere studente, verhoog omdat na my mening die kinders gepenaliseer is omdat daar ’n te hoë standaard gestel is. Ek dink dit spreek boekdele. As ’n mens nou opvolgwerk doen en vra waar daardie oud-studente van Standerton se Indiër Hoërskool is, dan kan ’n mens gaan kyk na Durban-Westville en sien hoe daardie studente presteer. Dit is ’n eer vir daardie mense om as oud-skoliere van daardie skool gereken te word. Indien ons nou kyk na hierdie memorandum van die agb. Minister dan sien ons verder dat daar onder die begrotingspos No. 38 die volgende vir ons Indiërgemeenskappe bewillig is nl. 78 skole wat R13,9 miljoen ontvang het, die Indiër universiteit wat R2,4 miljoen en die tegniese kolleges wat R0,6 miljoen onderskeidelik ontvang het. Dié inrigtings is verder aan die ontwikkel. Ek dink dit is ’n prestasie aan die kant van die agb. Minister en van die Departement van Indiërsake dat dit bereik kon word. Om terug te keer spesifiek na die onderwys waar daar enkele sake is wat ek wil uitlig wat vir my besonder belangrik is nl. dat daar verpligte onderwys ingevoer kon word. Dit is ’n mikpunt wat gestel was en bereik is. Die leerlingtal het met ongeveer 5% die afgelope boekjaar gegroei. Verdere prestasies na my mening is die toewyding van die personeel, die mense wat verantwoordelik is vir die onderrig en die versorging van daardie leerlinge. Ek merk in hierdie verslag op dat by een skool waar die kinders in ’n koshuis tuis is word daar tipiese Indiër-geregte aan hulle voorgesit wat deur dieetkundiges as ’n gebalanseerde ete op die Indiese manier aangebied word. Dit is ’n besondere reëling.

In hierdie debat kan ek nie nalaat om die prestasies van die Universiteit van Durban-Westville te meld nie. Dit is vir ons mooi dat daar ’n uitbreiding is vanaf klasse na Pietermaritzburg, Chatsworth en Stanger tot diens van die gemeenskappe daar. Nou kom ek uit by wat na my mening die allerbelangrikste van hierdie saak is, nl. die gesindhede wat by daardie mense gekweek en ingelê word. Daarom wil ek met die agb. lid vir Orange Grove rusie maak want dan moet hy nie dié gesindheid aan die dag lê wat hy vanaand hier geopenbaar het nie want aangesien daardie mense nie die agb. lid se gesindheid deel nie. Hulle kom nie hieroor met ’n bitterbek verwyt nie maar met nugtere siening. Hierdie mense wil saamwerk met entoesiasme, met helder oë en begrip wil hulle inklim in die uitdagings van ons tyd. Ons moet dan soos die agb. lid vir Umhlanga gesê het, eerlik wees met onsself en sê Blank, Indiër en Kleurlinge het een Vaderland, een gemeenskaplike trou, een liefde, een lojaliteit en ons moet in ’n ander lig na mekaar kyk. Ons moet nie haatdraendheid opberg nie en ons groeiende jongmense gelaai laat word met negatiewe dinge nie. Ons moet gelaai word met die begrip dat hierdie drie volkere dieselfde basis deel. Ek wil vanaand sê dat dié Indiërs wat ek ken se naelstring met die Ooste vanwaar hulle kom al lankal geknip is en dat die geskiedenis van my gebied deurspek is met die bydrae van klein Indiërsake winkeltjies op die platteland wat in die bitter dertiger depressiejare ook ’n deel gehad het in die voeding van die arm Blanke Afrikaner wat daar gewoon het. Ons kan dit nie miskien nie. Hulle het ’n bydrae gebring en ek meld dit vanaand hier met groot respek, openhartigheid en vrymoedigheid. Ek wil daardie mense ook respekteer en ken en daardie mense is dankbaar dat aan hulle vandag ’n geleentheid gegee word, dat hulle nie „voiceless” is nie maar dat daar kanale geskep word vir hulle om na vore te kom. Daarom wil ek vanaand die agb. Minister vra of daar nie ’n geleentheid geskep kan word sodat ons na die herstrukturering van die hele onderwysstelsel van hierdie drie volkere kan kyk nie, veral met die oog op ons toekomstige volkerebedeling. Ek meen daar behoort groter kontak te wees tussen die topstrukture van die onderwys want daardeur kan ’n beter begrip vir mekaar se probleme, ’n uitruiling van idees en ’n wedersydse verstandhouding ontstaan. Op hierdie manier kan ons mekaar die hand reik. As ons dit kan bewerkstellig, sal die onderskeie groepe nie vreemde pole vir mekaar wees nie, maar sal hulle mekaar leer ken en respekteer in die wete dat dit ons gesamentlike verantwoordelikheid is om nie net vir hierdie land te sterf nie, maar om dit ook te ontwikkel na die beste van ons vermoë. Suid-Afrika het ook die kundigheid van die Indiërs nodig as entrepreneurs in diens van ons volk en vaderland.

Mr. Chairman, I think the hon. member for Standerton will forgive me if I do not follow directly on what he had to say. He made a very enthusiastic speech and I believe the enthusiasm that he displayed is quite an interesting feature on its own, but I trust he will forgive me if I do not follow directly on what he said. So much was said by him that I think the hon. the Minister will have difficulty in replying to all the points he raised.

The aspect I want to deal with in regard to Indian Affairs also to a very large extent deals with the attitudes of the Government and the Indians in South Africa in shaping the future new Republic that the hon. member for Standerton and other hon. members spoke about. My friend, the hon. member for Umhlanga, did indicate to this Committee and the hon. the Minister that we must be truthful with ourselves when we deal with the future prosperity and quality of life of the other population groups in South Africa who currently are less favourably endowed than the Whites. When the hon. the Minister so eloquently gilds that lily, I think he will also be the first to admit that there is considerable room for improvement. In fact, we would like to hear about the future plans as well as the past achievements of the Nationalist Government.

I am the first to admit that I am sure a large part of the Indian community of South Africa as well as many of the Whites appreciate the progress that has been made, but I think the greatest challenge of all still lies ahead, and that is to convert the thinking of the Government Indeed, I have some difficulty in believing that the Government will in fact be able to achieve a holistic approach to the Indians of South Africa. I believe that what we must do is to change our attitude and our thinking from the perimeters of the purely material aspect of improving the lot of the Indian South Africans and to ensure that they also share in the psychological benefits of being true citizens of South Africa. It is a great pity, therefore, that one still finds many instances of the denigration of the Indian South African, despite the many material achievements. And I have very serious doubts as to whether this Government is going to have the courage to cross that final bridge that will restore the dignity to the Indian South Africans.

What is that final bridge?

The final bridge, Mr. Chairman, is to give those people true dignity and a pride in being South Africans, and to remove from the social situation in South Africa those many hurtful, harmful and rejective practices of the present Government. [Interjections.] For the benefit of hon. members on that side I will quote very simple examples of the psychological harm that we do to these people while we stare at their material well-being. As important as that is, I believe that the psychological integration of these people into a holistic South African plural society is even more important.

Recently it came to the notice of many people here and also overseas that our military forces had taken a very realistic attitude when it came to training in the defence of our country. We have an example of this very close at hand, and this is one of many instances I can quote, where Indians have volunteered to serve in the S.A. Navy. They have done an exceedingly good job and their loyalty to South Africa is beyond reproach. If one goes down to look at the facilities at the naval base, one finds that the different race groups share these in true fashion. They share quarters, the mess, the drudgery and they also share the pride of serving in the S.A. Defence Force. A group of these young military trainees, Indians and Whites, recently travelled in one bus to Newlands to watch a sporting event. And yet when they got there, these people who are one unitary force had to be separated. They had to sit on separate stands, make use of separate facilities and, in fact, the Indians had to make use of the inferior facilities available.

That happens to men and women too.

Yes, that happens to men and women too, Sir, but the women have every opportunity to fight back, while I don’t think the Indians have. This is only one example of the other side of the coin which the hon. the Minister does not admit to in this Committee and in other places. I have therefore very serious doubts as to whether that Government has the courage to take the final step and cross that bridge, a step that is so terribly important.

I am sure there are many other examples; for instance, Cato Manor that has been mentioned this evening which is a classic example, and also Chatsworth. Indeed, I would like to challenge the hon. the Minister to arrange, through his department, to have a proper scientific survey done of the feelings of the people living in Chatsworth today, to find out how they feel about living in that area. I think the hon. the Minister and his department are in for a shock, Sir, because those rows and rows of stereotyped houses that were built without consulting the people as to what they wanted or where they wanted to stay, have produced sociological changes which have been to the detriment of the Indian community.

What is the City Council doing about it?

What are you going to do about it?

It is not what I am going to do about it, Sir. It is what I want the hon. the Minister to do about it. Moving people from one area to the other and changing their physical environment does not necessarily change the quality of life for them. The crime rate in Chatsworth is astronomical.

The breakdown of the family structure has done serious damage to the culture of the Indians. I would like to ask the hon. the Minister to see to it that his department undertakes a survey of how the people of Chatsworth feel about their position. Then, Sir, perhaps next year the hon. the Minister can come and tell us the outcome of such a survey and perhaps he will then be able to avoid the pitfalls of forcing people to change even from a slum area to what appears to be materially a more beneficial area, only to find that it has been to the detriment of the family structure, the integrity and the esteem of those people. I make a very serious appeal to the hon. the Minister not to undertake this forced type of removal that we have heard about so often in South Africa, but perhaps to take a leaf out of the book of one of his colleagues, the hon. the Minister of Cooperation and Development. I put this question to this hon. Minister last year and he fobbed it off by saying that I should talk to the Minister of Community Development but I am talking about the Indian people and not so much about their houses. The leaf that the hon. the Minister can take out of his colleague’s book is, first of all, to have urban renewal that was mentioned earlier this evening and, secondly, to introduce a system of self-help in an effort to bring about improved housing. I asked the hon. the Minister a question in that regard last year but he would not reply to it because he thought I was talking about community development. I know that in Lenasia self-help has been undertaken but I believe that the only way to motivate a community to improve itself in terms of the total quality of life, the holistic approach, is to get their total co-operation and thereby ensure that their quality of life is in fact ideal and what they want.

Then I should like to turn briefly to the housing problem that has been discussed here this evening. The hon. the Minister rattled off many figures, but in conjunction with the self-help scheme I would like to point out to him that we can reduce the cost of improved housing for the Indian community if we apply the self-help system to a greater extent. If one has a look at the birth-rate of the Indians it will be found that there is an annual addition of some 17 800 to the Indian population. I am talking predominantly about the Durban area. These people are going to require additional housing, and that means that in Durban alone we are going to require an additional 8 900 houses in the near future. Now, if we can employ the self-help scheme, those people by better opportunities, due to the education that is being offered to them, will be able to assist us to reduce the actual bill.

I would like to query the figures the hon. the Minister gave us in regard to the Durban area, Sir, because he will know that a recent survey whose information was published last year, indicated a backlog of 24 000 houses in the Durban area alone. The hon. the Minister mentioned a shortage of 14 000 as being almost the end of the road. And that was only the backlog without taking into account the natural increase in the population in the Durban area.

The cost factor is also very important. Whether the figure is 24 000 or 14 000, makes no difference to the point that I would like to make to the hon. the Minister, and that is that we must help the Indian community to help itself to solve these problems. We can help them … [Time expired.]

Mnr. die Voorsitter, ek het geluister na die toespraak van die agb. lid vir Durban-Noord. Daar was ’n paar positiewe klanke in sy toespraak, veral in die begin waar hy wel erkenning getoon het vir die groot werk wat die agb. Minister en sy departement doen ten opsigte van die welvaart van die Indiërs. Ek vind egter later in sy toespraak ’n geweldige negatiewe benadering. Ek wil graag met die agb. lid saamstem waar hy gesê het „the grand challenge lies ahead”. Dit is so, mnr. die Voorsitter, dat die Nasionale Regering die landsregering oorgeneem het op ’n tydstip toe daar geweldige uitdagings was. Toe het ons ’n nuwe tydvak betree waar ons ’n nuwe dimensie tegemoet gegaan het. Die agterstand waarmee die Nasionale Regering begin het, is reeds tydens sy bewind tot ’n groot mate ingehaal. Ek wil met die agb. lid saamstem; Rome is nie in een dag gebou nie. „The great challenge lies ahead” en die Nasionale Regering stuit nie vir een oomblik voor daardie uitdaging nie. Die Nasionale Regering sal daardie uitdaging aanvaar.

Meneer, ’n mens kan in ’n baie rustige luim met die agb. lid vir Durban-Noord gesels. Maar wanneer die agb. lid vir Orange Grove egter ter sprake kom, voel dit asof my bloed wil opborrel—al is ek ’n vredeliewende mens—soos die agb. lid van Standerton se bloed opgeborrel het toe hy met groot opgewondenheid gereageer het op wat daardie agb. lid gesê het. Ek het onder die indruk gekom dat die agb. lid, terwyl die agb. Minister so ’n mooi uiteensetting gegee het van wat ten opsigte van hervestiging gedoen is, hom sit en opwerk het en hier tot ’n uitbarsting gekom het as reaksie op wat die agb. Minister gesê het. Meneer, dit is maklik om ’n klomp hartseerstories te verkondig van hoe mense uit hul huise gesit is en op sypaadjies sit met hulle gesinne sonder ’n dak oor hulle koppe. Ek gaan dit nie betwis dat daar geïsoleerde gevalle voorgekom het nie. Ek dink egter ons moet deur ’n ander bril kyk na die hervestigingsgedagte. Ons moet dit beskou vanuit die oogpunt soos die agb. Minister dit uiteengesit het. Ons moet wegkom van die gedagte om dit uit ’n politieke oogpunt te beskou en politiekery daarvan te maak.

Hierdie Nasionale Regering het ’n Indiërgemeenskap geërf wat in daardie stadium—dit is baie duidelik gestel deur agb. lede wat voor my gepraat het—nie as ’n deel van die Suid-Afrikaanse bevolking erken was nie. Agb. lede aan die oorkant wat vandag in verskillende partye sit, moet na my mening baie versigtig nadink voordat hulle so te kere gaan. As ek reg is, kom hulle almal uit die geledere van ’n party wat vir baie jare, voor die Nasionale Regering se bewindsaanvaarding, die geleentheid gehad het—die agb. lid hoef nie sy kop te skud nie—om vir die Indiërgemeenskap ’n baie beter bedeling te geskep het as wat die Nasionale Party in 1948 gevind het.

Mnr. die Voorsitter, ek wil onderstreep wat die agb. Minister gesê het in verband met die hervestiging van Indiërs. In my eie kiesafdeling is ’n Indiërgemeenskap bestaande uit 800 siele. Die agb. Minister dra terdee kennis van daardie gemeenskap want hy het elke aspek van die hervestiging van daardie Indiërs self hanteer. Dit is asof hy dit met sy eie hand gedoen het. Daardie mense wat hoofsaaklik uit ’n handelaarsgemeenskap van 47 lisensiehouers bestaan het, was oor ons dorp versprei. Hulle het in die haglikste toestande geleef; hulle het gewoon in krotte agter hulle winkeltjies. Hulle het huur betaal vir die geboutjies; dit het nie aan hulle behoort nie en daardie geboutjies het almal gedreig om inmekaar te sak. Onder die Minister en sy departement, het die Regering ’n Indiërwoonbuurt daar geproklameer en vandag is al daardie Indiërs daar gehuisves. Hulle bly in baie gerieflike en gemaklike omstandighede. Hulle slaap elkeen rustig in hul eie bed. Hulle beskik oor ’n sakesentrum wat teen ’n koste van bykans R4 miljoen opgerig is. Daardie winkels is beter as enige Blanke winkel in Middelburg. Daardie mense is in hulle eie gebied as handelaars gevestig. Die agb. Minister het aangedui dat hulle reeds ten volle hervestig is. Ek kan dit bevestig. Wat meer is, hulle is gelukkig. Wat ons in die hervestigingsprogram nie uit gedagte moet verloor nie, is dat ons hier te doen het met ’n gemeenskap wat ’n groter premie plaas op hulle eie identiteit as wat vir enige ander bevolkingsgroep in die hele wêreld geld. Meneer, hulle is nie alleen as ’n groep geïdentifiseer en trots op daardie identiteit nie; hulle is selfs nog verder verdeel. Hulle is besonder fyn verdeel in geloofs- en taalgroepe. In die uitvoering van ons beleid moet ons aan hulle ’n behoorlike geleentheid bied om hulself te kan wees en te kan bly. Dan moet ons nie huil soos agbare lede aan die oorkant as ons aan hulle aparte geriewe en geleenthede gee waar hulle hulself kan uitleef en tot volle ontplooiing kan kom nie.

Meneer, as ek nog tyd tot my beskikking het wil ek baie graag van die geleentheid gebruik maak om die agb. Minister en sy departement hartlik geluk te wens met hierdie pragtige jaarverslag wat voor ons gelê is. As ek geluister het na wat die agb. lid vir Bezuidenhout gesê het toe hy gevra het of die agb. Minister weet wat hy doen en of hy weet waarheen hy gaan, dink ek dat as ons hierdie jaarverslag deurgaan wat in ’n pragtige en eenvoudige vorm aan ons voorgelê is, ons daarin ’n weerspieëling sal vind van wat die NP vir die Indiërgemeenskap in die land doen. Meneer, ons het ’n Indiërgemeenskap van min of meer ’n driekwart miljoen. Wat word nie alles gedoen om die Indiërgemeenskap gelukkig te laat leef en woon nie. Ons kom elke oomblik onder die indruk daarvan. As die kleinste gemeenskap van ons bevolking, kom dit noodwendig daarop neer dat die eenheidskoste per kop baie hoër is as enige ander gemeenskap. Dit word gedoen om hulle tot hul reg te laat kom. As ek na die dinge kyk is ek daarvan oortuig dat ons in ons beleid ten opsigte van die Indiërgemeenskap volkome sukses behaal.

Ek wil graag die agb. Minister en sy departement sterkte toewens vir die toekoms. Soos die agb. lid vir Durban-Noord gesê het: „The challenge lies ahead.” Ek wil die agb. Minister en sy departement sterkte toewens in die wete dat wat hierdie Regering ten opsigte van die Indiërs aanpak en doen, soos ook die nuwe bedeling wat ingevolge die voorgestelde nuwe Grondwet vir hulle in die vooruitsig gestel word, hulle tot groot hoogtes sal lei en dat hulle ’n rustige en trotse gemeenskap sal wees met wie ons baie goeie verhoudinge kan handhaaf.

Mnr. die Voorsitter, die agb. lid vir Bezuidenhout het ’n baie ware stelling gemaak toe hy gesê het dat Suid-Afrika sy Indiërbevolking sodanig moet behandel dat hulle waardige ambassadeurs vir Suid-Afrika in die buiteland sal wees. Die vraag wat daarmee gepaard gaan, is of Suid-Afrika inderdaad sy Indiërbevolking goed genoeg behandel sodat hulle waardige ambassadeurs vir Suid-Afrika wil wees. Dit is die vraag. Die antwoord sal terselfdertyd bepaal of die agb. lid vir Musgrave korrek is as hy beweer dat rassediskriminasie in feitlik alle fasette van ons samelewing voorkom. Hy skilder vir ons ’n swart en ongelukkige prentjie van onderdrukte Indiërs in Suid-Afrika. Die antwoord sal ook bepaal of die Regering se volkerebeleid van „gun aan andere wat jy jouself gun”, sukses meebring wat ons Indiërbevolking betref.

Ons moet in gedagte hou dat die Indiër maar ’n skamele eeu lank in Suid-Afrika is, en dat hy slegs sedert 1961 permanent hier is. In die lewe van ’n volk is twee dekades baie min. Die kern van die saak is hoe Indiërs in Suid-Afrika behandel word.

Ek wil begin by die Indiërkind. Daar word spesiaal voorsiening gemaak vir Indiërkleuters. By die departement is sewe kleuterskole geregistreer. Daar word ook omgesien na spesiale onderwys vir die Indiërkind. Die beleid van die Regering is dat voorsiening gemaak moet word vir bykomende en nuwe fasiliteite vir Indiërleerlinge met besondere behoeftes. Daar is spesiale opleiding vir verstandelik vertraagde Indiërkinders waarvoor subsidies aan drie opleidingsentra betaal word vir sowat 150 Indiërleerlinge. Daar word ook voorsiening gemaak vir serebraal verlamde Indiërkinders waarvoor subsidies vir omtrent 70 leerlinge betaal word. Daar is omvattende remediërende dienste by uitgesoekte primêre skole vir Indiërkinders, wat aangebied word by wyse van gespesialiseerde dienste, ontwerp vir leerlinge wat leerprobleme het, maar andersins normale of selfs bonormale intellek besit Daar is ook ’n skoolkliniek. Die Skool- en Sielkundige Dienste van die Afdeling Onderwys behartig ’n skoolkliniek vir Indiërkinders by sy hoofkantoor te Durban. Die doel van die kliniek is om die emosionele, sosiale en leerprobleme van leerlinge te diagnoseer en te behandel.

Daar is ook vir die dowe Indiërkind voorsiening getref. Die Lenasia-skool vir dowes, wat 50 Indiërleerlinge sal huisves, is reeds geregistreer as ’n private skool. Daar word ook voorsiening gemaak vir blinde Indiërkinders. Daar is ook voorsiening vir Indiërkinders wat onder die Kinderwet verwys word na die nywerheidskool in Newcastle.

Die voorafgaande is ’n kort aanduiding van die spesiale fasiliteite wat die voorskoolse en gestremde Indiërkind kry. Wat die Indiër skoolgaande kind betref—en dit is baie belangrik—behalwe dat hy verpligte onderwys het, wil ek syfers verstrek wat aandui hoeveel Indiërkinders inderdaad skoolgaan. Byna ’n kwart miljoen Indiërkinders woon skole in Suid-Afrika by. By die Universiteit van Durban-Westville is daar meer as 4 000 studente. By die Universiteite van Rhodes en Kaapstad en by die Universiteit van die Witwatersrand is daar meer as 1 000 Indiërstudente en by Unisa is daar ongeveer 4 000. Hierdie syfers kom daarop neer dat 31% van die Indiërs in Suid-Afrika skoolgaan. As ons hierdie syfers vergelyk met dié van Uganda se Swart mense sowel as dié van Nigerië, dan staan ons verstom, want daar gaan slegs 7% van die bevolking skool, terwyl 31% van ons Indiërkinders, en waarskynlik selfs meer, in Suid-Afrika skoolgaan. Die onderrig van die kind is sekerlik een van die mees belangrikste norms om te meet hoe goed dit met jou gaan. In die lig van die onderwyssyfer vra ek vir die agb. lid vir Musgrave: waar is die diskriminasie?

Wat slaagsyfer betref, het die hoë peil van onderwysdienste wat verskaf word in Suid-Afrika, tesame met die hoë intellektuele vermoeë van die Indiër, veroorsaak dat in 1978 byna 90% van die leerlinge vir die senior sertifikaat met matrikulasievrystelling geslaag het.

Die Departement van Arbeid se deure staan vir die naskoolse Indiërkind oop met toetse, plasing en werkloosheidsprobleme. Waar werk hy dan as hy klaar is met sy studies en opgelei is? Daar is ’n ope mark. Die dae is verby toe die Indiër bloot ’n arbeider was en in die klein- en groothandel gewerk het. Hy kan by die Staande Mag aansluit. Hy kan by die Polisie aansluit waar ’n Indiër tans reeds die hoë rang van majoor beklee. Hulle kan in die private sektor werk en in die professies uitstyg. Hulle is ook welkom in die Staatsdiens. In hierdie verband wil ek die voorbeeld van die onderwys beroep meld. Toe hierdie Departement in 1966 Indiër onderwys van die provinsies oorgeneem het, was daar slegs ses Indiëropsieners. In hierdie stadium het die Indiër reeds gevorder tot die rang van hoofinspekteur. Ten opsigte van die Indiërs se vakkundige maatskaplike dienste word alle vakkundige dienste, behalwe twee poste, huidiglik deur Indiërs gevul.

Wat gesondheidsdienste betref, is daar spesiale hospitale vir Indiërs. Die beplanning van bv. die Laudium- en Lenasia-hospitale word spesiaal met Indiërs gereël. Daar word oorleg gepleeg omdat Indiërs besondere vereistes en probleme het. Daar word oorleg met hulle gepleeg wat betref spesiale voedsel en gebedekamers wat hulle in die hospitale aangebring wil hê.

Mnr. die Voorsitter, ek kan só voortgaan, maar weens gebrek aan tyd kan ek nie besonderhede verstrek van die groot verskeidenheid ander dienste wat aan die Indiër gelewer word, soos sport, ontspanning, behuising, ouetehuise, ens., nie. Wat my betref, is die belangrikste faktor egter dat die Nasionale Party die andersheid van die Indiër erken. Die Nasionale Party erken die Indiër se afkoms van Oosterse kultuur, sy godsdiens en sy taal. Sy nasieskap word vir hom gewaarborg deur die Nasionale Party, deurdat hy uiteindelik onder meer ook sy eie parlement sal kry.

Ek sluit af deur te sê dat die vraag van hoe dit met die Indiër in Suid-Afrika gaan, met bewyse beantwoord is. Dit gaan goed met hom. Suid-Afrikaanse Indiërs is inderdaad waardige ambassadeurs vir Suid-Afrika in die buiteland. Die Nasionale Party se volkerebeleid wat betref die Indiër, slaag. Die onverantwoordelike bewerings van algemene diskriminasie is vals. Die Indiër het inderdaad ’n goue toekoms in Suid-Afrika.

Mr. Chairman, the speech by the hon. member for Jeppe has followed a pattern very similar to those of his hon. colleagues this afternoon and earlier this evening. I shall deal with that pattern in general terms during the course of the short time at my disposal.

In reply to the comments of the hon. the Minister after dinner this evening, I want to say that clearly from his response I was correct when I started off this afternoon, at the commencement of this discussion, in anticipating the type of response we would get from the hon. the Minister. When I talked about gilding the lily, I was not being particularly critical of the hon. the Minister; I was merely anticipating his style. It is a style to which one has become accustomed. He does this, and sometimes he does it with great charm as he did again this evening. I do not belittle the achievements of the hon. the Minister or his department in the job which they are there to do. I said clearly in my earlier remarks that certainly one must acknowledge that there have been improvements in education and in housing as well as in other amenities. However, this is, after all, the function of the department. The hon. the Minister I am sure will concede, as an old parliamentarian, that it ought not to be my function as the chief spokesman for the Opposition to stand up here and go through the report and say this is a wonderful report page by page. This is not my function, Sir. It is not the function of the Opposition. One takes a lot of these things for granted. It is not my function either to spend a long time congratulating the officials of the Department and so forth. All of us who deal with the hon. the Minister’s Department as well as with other Departments, certainly receive nothing but courtesy and assistance from members of these Departments and we thank them for it. Time does not, however, allow one to go into that sort of thing.

The point that I am trying to make constantly is that while we had the speech that we had from the hon. member for Jeppe as well as those from other hon. members setting out the great achievements of the Department, these are, after all, the rights of the Indian community. They are taxpayers of South Africa the same as White people are taxpayers in South Africa. They are entitled to educational facilities and to other facilities.

I believe that this is the function of the Government. These things alone will not satisfy the aspirations of the Indian community. In this regard the hon. member for Durban North was spot-on as regards the comments which he made. This I am afraid is something one finds not only in discussions with this hon. Minister but also in discussions with hon. Ministers who control other Departments dealing with other racial communities.

The difference in South Africa is the question of ideology. The departments can do great and practical things, but they have a mental block when it comes to departing from the ideology of separate development. This is where the whole situation is going to fail. This hon. Minister must realize that whatever he is doing in this regard by constantly forcing the Indian community into separate compartments, however well those compartments may be run and whatever opportunities there may exist in those compartments, will not satisfy the aspirations of this section of the South African community. It is not going to work. It is not going to be accepted within South Africa. It will not be accepted by the Indian community or by other communities in South Africa. It will just not work. The sooner hon. members on that side of the Committee stop fooling themselves about and stop blinding themselves to the realities of the South African situation, the better it will be for this country.

The hon. member for Rissik who was the first speaker on the Government benches this afternoon normally strikes one as being a fairly intelligent and thoughtful member, but he astounded me by taking exception to a few words that I had used when I talked about people who were voiceless and restless—the Black community who were voiceless and restless. The hon. member took great exception to that. Sir, I cannot believe that in the year 1979, in the situation in which we exist in South Africa, thoughtful and intelligent members of Parliament can challenge the fact that Blacks in South Africa are restless. Does he really believe that they are not restless in South Africa at the present time? If so, the hon. member should have been with me and the hon. the Minister of Co-operation and Development in kwaZulu last week; he should have been with me at Ulundi on Saturday to see evidence of restlessness among Blacks. He can go to Soweto and other parts of South Africa and he will find something which is a fact of life in South Africa, and members on both sides have got to recognize that. We have to show concern about it and we have to try to do something about it. But to attack me for saying that Blacks are restless, is to be out of contact with the realities in South Africa.

On the question of voicelessness, the hon. member’s argument probably is that they have a voice on certain councils and at certain levels, but the point I was trying to make—although I did not say it specifically it must have been clear from my remarks—was that in respect of the laws that matter South Africa, and the laws that matter are those passed by this Parliament, the Blacks were certainly voiceless and so is the Indian community.

Are the Tswanas voiceless?

But the Tswanas have now been given independence, of a kind, but it is a totally inadequate independence. [Interjections.] Can you say to the Blacks in Soweto … Sir, I am sorry; we are talking about the Indians and I am being carried away. As far as the Indian community is concerned, have they any say in respect of the laws that are passed in this Parliament? Have they a voice? They have no voice at all. [Interjections.] They have some form of consultation; they have to deal with a department of this Parliament but they have no voice whatsoever in regard to the laws which are passed by this Parliament and hon. members cannot deny that.

Is your formula the only one that can work?

No. I am making a statement in answer to the accusation or the attack made by the hon. member for Rissik this afternoon.

The hon. member for Newcastle made a speech which I regard as a moderate and reasonable speech for him. One often experiences less moderate speeches by that hon. member. But he did say that the Indians were looking with a new eye at the new constitutional proposals. He made a statement which I would say is absolutely correct and that was that we should decide with the Indians and not for them. Those are fine sentiments, Sir. However, his earlier statement that the Indians were looking with a new eye at the new constitutional developments has to be proved, Sir. Because the fact of the matter is—and the record shows it—that the Indian community has rejected the new constitutional dispensation as they know it. There is as yet no evidence to the contrary, so I think the hon. member was indulging in a good deal of wishful thinking.

The hon. member for Kimberley South made a speech which verged on the dangerous and on the irresponsible. He attacked some of the attitudes adopted by very responsible Indian leaders, in particular Mr. A. H. Mullah. Mr. A. H. Mullah, as chairman of the council, adjourned the council because it could not come to agreement. The council were unhappy about the way in which certain matters were being handled by the hon. the Minister and the department. They were unhappy about the discrimination suffered by the Indian community. These were the reasons they gave, very valid reasons on the part of responsible members of the Indian community, and the hon. member for Kimberley South described this as an incident of political childishness. I thought his warning to the Indian community was a very dangerous one indeed because the Indian community are part and parcel of the entire South African community. They see their future alongside that of the Whites in South Africa and alongside that of the other Blacks in South Africa. I do not think it behoved the hon. gentleman to warn them about the dangers of aligning with one or other group because we are all in this country together.

The hon. member for Geduld talked at great length about the wonderful achievement of the development of the Indian Council in South Africa. He said that the Indians had become part of South Africa under the Nationalist Government and that their permanence had been recognized. He also said that the Government was striving to give the Indian community a say in the affairs of South Africa and that no other Government had been prepared to do so. Sir, this Opposition holds no brief for any previous Government in South Africa but I want to remind hon. members that it is not correct to say that no other Government offered the Indian community any say in the making of laws in South Africa. There is of course the record of the old UP in 1947. They actually offered the Indians representation in this Parliament and they were met with the most vigorous opposition by members of the Nationalist Party throughout. The hon. the Minister will remember that very clearly. All the references to what previous Governments might or might not have done would suggest that if a Government had made any progressive attempts in those days, they would have received the support of the then Nationalist Party in Opposition, and we know, in fact, that this is not so. So to use these arguments which are relative arguments really takes us nowhere in trying to solve the problem as we see it at the present time.

During the very few remaining minutes at my disposal, I want to deal very briefly with the hon. the Minister’s comments. He chided me for saying that there was a disparity in job opportunities in South Africa. The hon. the Minister produced figures to show that job opportunities had increased, but the real issue when one looks at job opportunities of the lack thereof in relation to an accusation of discrimination, is whether there are the same opportunities for the Indian community as there are for the White community. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, we have come to the end of the discussion and I still have to answer a few of the hon. members who have taken part in the debate. I shall do so to the best of my ability. I want to start with the hon. member for Orange Grove immediately because I want to get his speech behind me as quickly as possible. For some reason or other the hon. member lost his cool. He rose like a raving, ranting, pawing, snorting rhinoceros and half-blindly charged into this debate. He made a number of wild statements which I will show in a minute were completely unfounded and badly motivated. He did his very best, Sir, to say nasty things; he did his very best to present his case in such a manner that anybody who did not know what the true position was, would feel that the most terrible injustices were being done to the Indian community and that they were the most unhappy and the most miserable community in South Africa. It was a speech which I would have expected from an agitator, which he is not. I would expect such a speech from a cheap agitator on a soap box in Hyde Park. I want to show you the sort of argument he used, Sir.

He had a lot to say about Pageview. His great complaint was that I did not apply urban renewal to Pageview; why did I not renew Pageview and allow the traders to stay and to settle there? May I tell him why? Firstly, Pageview was an overcrowded slum area. Had Pageview been renewed as an urban area it would not have been possible to resettle half the people of Pageview there. Secondly, Pageview was a dirty slum. I mentioned a short while ago that a large number of the homes did not even have toilet facilities. How those people lived, I do not know. Thirdly, Sir, Pageview is too small to support a community. I am not interested only in building a conglomeration of houses; I want to establish viable, progressive communities, communities that will have aspirations, communities that can achieve things and realize themselves. [Interjections.] Wait a minute! I want the hon. member to know that had I changed Pageview into a urban renewal scheme and put the Indians back there, they would have wanted a school for their children, they would have wanted playing fields and parks. Do you know, Sir, that to build a high school one requires 8 ha by modern standards and by the standards of the Department of Indian Affairs. One high school would occupy more than the whole of Pageview; there would not be room for a single house. That is the sort of difficulty I have with the hon. member. He spoke with no knowledge whatsoever. I have sympathy with those people; it is not an easy matter to be moved out a home one has occupied for a long time, no matter how humble it may be. There are members of the Indian community who were unhappy, but that is unfortunate. All of us have at some time in our lives to do things in the public interest which we do not like.

That is your interpretation.

That hon. member has talked to a few dissatisfied Indians there, he has taken their word as gospel, without carrying out any sort of check at all, and he has come here with these sweeping, bungling statements and has detracted from the quality of the entire debate.

Let me give you another example, Sir, and then, thank heavens, I shall be able to leave him. He spoke about Cato Manor. This hon. gentleman from Johannesburg has now become an expert on an involved problem in Durban. He referred to Cato Manor and said that Mr. Reddy, the chairman of the executive of the Indian Council has demanded, beyond any compromise, the return of Cato Manor to the Indians. Mr. Reddy does no such thing. Mr. Reddy is not mad. Mr. Reddy is not unjust. That is a statement in isolation …

I was quoting from a newspaper.

Yes, that is the trouble, Sir. He picked up a casual statement reported by the press and he did not check whether those were Mr. Reddy’s actual words.

Yes.

He did not, because had he done so Mr. Reddy would have helped him and put him right.

That is Mr. Reddy’s belief.

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Reddy has made many other statements. For instance, he has emphatically stated that he does not want to disturb the occupation of a single White home in Cato Manor.

Right, I am with you. So he informed me.

But you say he is beyond compromise; he wants Cato Manor back.

I did not use those words.

Oh, you certainly did, and I asked you …

I read you those words …

Now he is qualifying it.

But you based your own sweeping opinion on that cutting and made a wild statement. Sir, does that hon. member know what the position was in Cato Manor when it was proclaimed a White group area? The population was 655 Whites, 2 250 Coloureds, 35 000 Indians and 60 000 Blacks. On what possible grounds would an intelligent, decent, gentleman like Mr. J. N. Reddy demand the whole of Cato Manor back when the Indian population only constituted about one-third of the total population at the time? Why would he do that? Does the hon. member know these facts? Why did he not check his facts?

As far as ownership of land was concerned, the following situation applied: The Coloureds owned 6,47 ha; the Blacks owned 24,68 ha; the City Council owned 300 ha; the Whites owned 740 ha; and the Indians owned 1 170 ha, about half the entire area. Do you really think Mr. Reddy would demand something which was never his? Would he demand more than half of Cato Manor? I really think this hon. gentleman should be ashamed of himself. He has come here and made these wild statements, these agitative statements. [Interjections.] He did not know his facts; he did not know what he was talking about He relied upon isolated newspaper items …

Order!

… and he did not check his facts.

Order! The hon. the Minister cannot use the expression “agitative statements”.

Agitative?

Yes, I must ask the hon. the Minister to withdraw that expression.

It certainly was an agitated statement, Sir. [Interjections.] But I shall withdraw that statement. I am sorry, Sir, I did not mean to convey anything which was unparliamentary. I shall leave it at that. There are other speeches which deserve more attention.

Die agb. lid vir Geduld het met groot kennis die geskiedenis van die S.A. Indiërraad vir ons geskets, hoe dit gevorder het, hoe dit omskep is, wat dit alreeds tot die bevordering van die Indiër se saak bygedra het, en ek dink hy sou nog verder gegaan het as hy net tyd gehad het om te wys dat dit die basis is vir toekomstige ontwikkeling. Ek wil hom baie daarvoor bedank. Die Indiërraad het sy vyande. Die Indiërraad het begin as ’n totaal genomineerde liggaam, maar tans is dit halfgenomineerd en half-verkose. Binnekort sal dit deur ’n raad vervang word wat ten volle verkose is, met dieselfde status as ons Parlement. Dié raad het derhalwe sy rol gespeel in Suid-Afrika. Maar wat interessant is, Meneer, is dat hierdie Indiërraad baie vinniger ontwikkel het as ander mense wat in soortgelyke posisies verkeer het.

Neem die Kaapkolonie as voorbeeld, wat in 1806 deur ’n vreemde moondheid beset is en ’n kolonie geword het. In 1815 het hy ’n adviserende raadjie gekry; in 1834 het hy ’n half-verkose wetgewende vergadering gekry; in 1854 het hy ’n wetgewende vergadering geword sonder baie magte, en eers in 1872 het hy verantwoordelike regering gekry. Dit het 55 jaar geduur, terwyl ons ons Indiërs opgehef het tot dié mate dat hulle binnekort hul eie volwaardige parlement sal hê binne ’n tydperk van 15 jaar. Dit is die verskil, Meneer, en daarom is ek so dankbaar dat die agb. lid vir Geduld hierdie inligting vir ons gegee het.

Ek wil die agb. lid vir Standerton baie bedank vir sy getuigskrif. Hy het aansienlike persoonlike ervaring van die Indiërgemeenskap van Standerton. Aanvanklik was die handelaars daar baie gekant teen hulle hervestiging, maar vanaand het die agb. lid hier bevestig wat ek gesê het, te wete dat as die Indiërs eers gesien het wat hulle gaan kry en die ervaring deurgegaan het, hulle van standpunt verander. Ek is baie trots op die werk wat in Standerton gedoen is; ek is trots op die munisipaliteit en dankbaar vir die Indiër-gemeenskap se ruiterlike erkenning dat dit in hulle eie voordeel is.

Die agb. lid vir Standerton het ook die kwessie van onderwys geopper en die hoop uitgespreek dat daar ’n hegte skakeling op onderwysgebied sal kom. Ek dink dit is ’n baie goeie idee en ek onderneem dat ons in oorleg met die ander onderwysdepartemente aandag aan hierdie saak sal gee en sal kyk watter verbeterings aangebring kan word. Ek is dankbaar vir sy positiewe voorstel.

The hon. member for Durban-North made an interesting speech. It was a speech very critical of the Government and very critical of the department in some respects and yet, Sir, it is the type of speech one listens to with great respect. It also has some influence on one’s thinking. I would say, Sir, that one word of criticism or advice uttered in the spirit of the hon. member for Durban North, is worth ten speeches by the hon. member for Orange Grove.

Hear, hear! [Interjections.]

I want to thank him very much for his attitude and for the manner in which he spoke, and he did not spare us in his criticism. [Interjections.] He asked us whether we would give our Indian people true dignity and pride as South Africans. We want to do that, and what I am about to say is also my answer to the only fresh remark made by the hon. member for Musgrave, viz. his complaint that we were blind in our adherence to the policy of separate development and that we did not see its weaknesses.

Sir, we want to give the Indians human dignity; we want to give all the peoples of South Africa true dignity and pride in their South Africanism. But, Sir, we want to do so subject to the observance of certain important principles. The main principle is that every community in South Africa—and my hon. friend agrees with me on this—is entitled to his own identity, his own nature, his own character, his own being.

We don’t disagree with that.

I know you do not, but my hon. friends over there do.

Yes.

They want a melting pot. But I want to say that if one wants every community to retain its own identity one must be careful that one community does not destroy another’s identity because it does not have a similar pride in its own identity. So for that reason some control must be exercised, there has to be some order in the life and in the expression of their existence of the various communities. Some degree of separation is necessary, not because one despises them but because one knows that some degree of separation is necessary to enable one to retain’s one’s own identity and to enable the other man to retain his identity as well.

So there must be discrimination.

No, I do not say that there must be discrimination; one can have separation without discrimination.

That is not so.

Of course one can. Europe is divided into different nations and nobody is going to say that that is discrimination or that the fact that Britain has its own character is discrimination against Belgium.

That is no argument.

I am sorry, Sir, but it is exactly the same principle, the principle of communities with their own identity and entitled to their own identity; and it is the duty of wise government to give them the opportunity to maintain their identity and to realize themselves as individual characters or individual communities. That is the basis of the philosophy of separate development.

That is our aim, Sir, and we are seeking to achieve it. We inherited a situation from a colonial regime where there were great problems and many mistakes were made. We are trying to unravel these problems. In the process we may make mistakes, but all I ask is that the sincerity of the Government must not be doubted when we say that our aim and object is the right of self-determination for the various communities in South Africa, each according to what is possible and practical in the South African setup. I think we have a lot in common here with our friends of the NRP. We may differ about the methods, but I do not think I am going to be faulted very strongly by them in this statement of the philosophy of this party. This philosophy is basic to the thinking of the whole Western world. Leaders in the Western world since the days of the French Revolution, after every major crisis in the world, have seen to it that more and more people have been given their identities and the opportunity to realize themselves as separate communities. That is why the number of members of the United Nations has increased from 44 in 1948 to more than 150 today. These are all the new peoples who were given the right of self-determination, and we stand by that. We stand by it sincerely and we will strive to achieve it justly, fairly and successfully for every community in South Africa.

The hon. member for Durban North also asked me to consider self-help for the Indian people.

More self-help.

That is better. One of the remarkable features of our South African Indian is his ability to help himself. I have seen townships we have built for the poor Indian people which were built according to simple standards because they could not afford more. But within four or five years those townships have changed their whole complexion and nature. As the Indians become more successful in life they improve their environment. They are house-proud beyond words and they establish suburbs with character of which South Africa can be proud. Chatsworth, like Soweto, was built in the days when housing was the only consideration. In July last year I visited five European countries. In countries like Britain, Germany, Switzerland, Spain and France housing was the only consideration after the War. In the process amenities were neglected. The idea was to get a roof over people’s heads and the rest could wait. We made the same mistake in Soweto, in Chatsworth and perhaps in other places. We have to rectify those mistakes and we are going to do it. I have already mentioned that we have made R4,8 million available to these towns to provide their own amenities, and we will increase that amount. We shall really try to make Chatsworth a town with character. We shall try to give it its own central business area, more parks, schools, shopping centres etc. It needs them, because I agree that at the moment it is a dull and drab town. We made a mistake when we built that town because in those days housing was urgent and priority number one. To catch up after one has made such a mistake is much more difficult than what we are doing at Phoenix and Mitchells Plain, where we are providing the amenities simultaneously with housing. Frankly admitting that we were overeager in building houses, I ask hon. members to give us a chance and help us to rectify the error of the past. I want to thank the hon. member for his practical suggestions. For his information I may just add that in all the new townships we develop for Indians and Coloureds—and we have agreed to apply these same standards in respect of Black housing financed through the Department of Community Development—20% of all the land made available for home building purposes now goes to the private owner for self-help purposes and his own development. I hope the hon. member will approve of that. I want to thank him for his contribution. We do not agree about many things but at least we do agree to behave like gentlemen towards each other.

Ek wil die agb. lede vir Middelburg en Jeppe bedank vir hulle getuigskrifte aan die Regering se beleid en aan my departement in die besonder. Hulle het navorsing gedoen en hulle onderwerp geken en het vir ons vertel wat deur die departement gedoen word. Ek het hulle bydraes baie waardeer. Wat vir my uit albei toesprake duidelik geblyk het, is dat die vordering wat gemaak word nie as gevolg daarvan is dat die departement die Indiërgemeenskap teen wil en dank met hom meesleur nie. Dit word hoofsaaklik na die nouste oorleg en in samewerking met die Indiërgemeenskap gedoen. Ons glo dat as ’n mens sukses in hierdie opsig wil behaal, moet jy die deelname van die Indiërs hê in die dinge wat vir hulle vordering gedoen word. Daarom het ons byvoorbeeld in die Departement van Indiërsake nou so ver gevorder dat van die 7 000 onderwysers daar tans slegs 40 of 50 Blanke onderwysers oorbly. Dit is ons strewe en deel van ons beleid dat hulle hulle eie geleenthede moet hê en ons gaan daarmee voort. Ons doen egter nie wat daar vandag voorgestel is nie, te wete, dat ons besluit wat goed is en dat hulle dan maar kan maak wat hulle wil nie. Daar is sekere beleidspunte waarop ons nie toegee nie. Enige Regering het sekere standpunte en daaraan word nie toegegee nie. Binne ons beleidsopset onderhandel ons, werk ons saam en soek ons die welwillendheid van elke gemeenskap.

I now come to the last speech of the hon. member for Musgrave. He did not criticize me much because I think he was more concerned to justify the speech he made earlier today. He also thought he could play around a bit with the speeches made by hon. members on this side of the House. He did make some snide remarks about the policy of separate development. When I referred to the speech of one of the other members I dealt with this aspect in detail. The hon. member must just accept the fact that we differ philosophically from one another but I appeal to him as a responsible person to accept the sincerity of the Government. Criticize us and damn us if you wish, but never doubt the sincerity of this Government in its wish to attain the highest achievements and the greatest opportunities for self-realization for every human being and also for every community according to its own nature in this interesting and diverse setup which is South Africa.

I hope you will reciprocate.

The hon. member spoke about job opportunities, equal job opportunities. We do not have completely equal job opportunities in South Africa at the moment, but we have come a long way. In this regard I wish to refer to our education policy. The University of Durban-Westville is another great success story in the annals of South African history. It was planned for only 2 000 students, but at the moment it is crowded with over 4 000 students. We are going to do big things for that university.

You will admit some Whites too, I hope?

But Whites are admitted to that university. The first White person received his Doctorate from that university at its last graduation ceremony. The hon. member must be careful not to make the same mistake as his benchmate. He must check his facts before he makes interjections. The M. L. Sultan Technicon is helping to educate 9 000 to 10 000 people in technical subjects. There are also other technical schools, a record number of ordinary schools and two teachers training colleges. This year alone an extra 7 000 children went to school and we had to fill 400 new teaching posts. We had the teachers to do it, and that is what we are achieving. As the Indians become educated and qualified for better job opportunities we will do our level best to see that job opportunities are created for them. To an increasing extent we will remove the barriers that may have existed in the past to their advancement in industry, commerce and the professions. However, it must be borne in mind that in the past a real fear existed among White workers that non-White people in this country with lower standards of living would compete for their jobs and would be willing to accept wages on which the White man could not survive. That is how trade unionism originated in the world. The first trade unions were established in the Eastern countries of England, viz. in the London area. Poverty was rife in the hinterland of England and people came from the depressed areas in their thousands and offered to do the work in the industries in London and its environs at wages on which the Londoner could not exist on the standard to which he was accustomed. Trade unions were originally established to enforce job reservation against migrant workers coming to London from other parts of England. That is a bit of economic history we all know. The same psychology obtained among White people in this country in the past. But now with the education the non-White people are receiving and the fact that their own standard of living is rising, this danger is diminishing. Because of the tremendous progress we are making with the upliftment of the people of South Africa, we are finding it possible to accept reports like that of the Wiehahn Commission, and to entrust it to the trade unions and the industrial councils to see that no injustices are done to the workers of South Africa. I hope that this process will be accelerated. The day may yet come when that hon. gentleman will walk up to me and say: “My word, Steyn, you people did a good job of work.” I am looking forward to that day. It will be a happy day for me and I will work to achieve that day.

Ek wil nou nogmaals baie dankie sê aan almal wat aan die debat deelgeneem het. Ons het ’n interessante en opbouende bespreking gehad. Aan u, mnr. die Voorsitter, wil ek baie dankie sê vir u leiding en vir die manier waarop u ons beheer het. Ten slotte wil ek my dank betuig aan die amptenary van die Departement van Indiërsake. Hulle is toegewyde mense wat hulle bes doen en dit doen binne die omvang van Regeringsbeleid, en wat die positiewe elemente van daardie beleid met geesdrif en ware toewyding aanpak. Ek het baie rede om dankbaar te wees en ek sien uit na verdere soortgelyke geleenthede om te praat oor die belange van ons Suid-Afrikaanse Indiërs.

Begrotingspos goedgekeur.